4.1. The Results of the Reliability Analyses of the OPT test and Attitude Questionnaire (Pilot Study)35
4.2. The Results of OPT Test for the Sampling Purpose36
4.3. Descriptive Statistics for the Items of the Attitude Questionnaire38
4.4. Inferential Statistics for the Attitude Questionnaire57
Chapter 5: Discussion
5.1. General Discussion61
5.2. Implications of the Study68
5.3. Limitations of the Study68
5.4. Suggestions for further Research69
List of Tables
Table 4.1: Reliability Statistics for the OPT test35
Table 4.2: Suggested Standards (Adopted From Barker, Pistrang, and Elliott, 199436
Table 4.3: Statistics For the OPT Test37
Table 4.4: Item Statistics for the for the Attitude Questionnaire38
Table 4.5: Item 1: Learning A Language Using Computer Software Was An Interesting Experience41
Table 4.6: Item 2: Language learning May be Important to My Goals, But I Do not Expect It to be Much Fun41
Table 4.7: Item 3: It Is Easier to Learn A Language at Home without Classroom Pressure42
Table 4.8: Item 4: I Worry a Lot About Making Mistakes in Classroom43
Table 4.9: Item 5:I Think Working at Home; Using Rosetta StoneTell me more Is More of a Computer Game than a Serious Instruction43
Table 4.10: Item 6: I have found that classroom attendance is not the only way to learn a language44
Table 4.11: Item 7: I would like to learn English, provided I allocate flexible time per week45
Table 4.12: Item 8: I Will Recommend Rosetta Stone/TELL ME MORE to My Friends45
Table 4.13: Item: 9 I would like to learn English through videos, photos, and graphics not just studying textbooks46
Table 4.14: Item 10: Learning with Computers Offers More Advantages over Traditional Methods of Language Education46
Table 4.15: Item 11: Computers Are Useful for Language Learning47
Table 4.16:Item 12: I Have No Difficulty in Operating the Basic Functions of Computers as far as Language-Learning Software Is Concerned47
Table 4.17: Item 13: Computers Have Proved to be Effective Learning Tools Worldwide48
Table 4.18: Item 14: Students Prefer Learning from Teachers to Learning from Computers49
Table 4.19: Item 15: I Think I Could Spend More Time Practicing Skills (Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing) Using Rosetta StoneTell me more49
Table 4.20: Item 16: I Prefer to Learn English through Rosetta StoneTell me more Because I Can Adjust My Own Speed of Learning50
Table 4.21: Item 17: I Would Rather Take A Formal Course Than A Self-Study Program51
Table 4.22: Item 18: Rosetta Stone/Tell me more Is So User-Friendly. It Is Quite Convenient for Me as an Ordinary Computer User51
Table 4.23: Item 19: I Enjoyed the Lessons of Rosetta StoneTell Me More52
Table 4.24: Item 20: I Think Speech Recognition System in Rosetta StoneTELL ME MORE Can Help You Sound Like a Native Speaker53
Table 4.25: Item 21: It Gradually Becomes Boring Working with Rosetta StoneTell me more53
Table 4.26: Item 22: It Is Important to Practice Prefabricated Conversation but There Is Not Such a Thing in Rosetta StoneTell me more54
Table 4.27: Item 23: The Speech Recognition System In Rosetta StoneTell me more Is Very Complicated. I Cannot Adjust My Tone to That of the Native Speaker’s54
Table 4.28: Item 24: It Is a Good Idea to Use Rosetta StoneTell me more but not as the Main Source of Education55
Table 4.29: Item 25: Diverse and Colorful Photos Used in Rosetta StoneTell me more Have Enormous Appeal56
Table 4.30: Item 26: If I Cannot Pursue a Formal Course In English, Anyway I Prefer to Use Rosetta StoneTell me more56
Table 4.31: Item 27: I Cannot Imagine How Exciting It Was to Practice at Home Using Rosetta StoneTell me more57
Table 4.32: Ranks of group (A) and (B) for their Attitudes58
Table 4.33: Mann Whitney U Test for EFL learners’ Attitudes towards the Packages58
در این سایت فقط تکه هایی از این مطلب با شماره بندی انتهای صفحه درج می شود که ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل ورد به داخل سایت کلمات به هم بریزد یا شکل ها درج نشود
شما می توانید تکه های دیگری از این مطلب را با جستجو در همین سایت بخوانید
ولی برای دانلود فایل اصلی با فرمت ورد حاوی تمامی قسمت ها با منابع کامل
List of Figures
Figure 4.1 the Comparison between Groups (A) And (B) With Respect To Their Attitudes towards the Two Language Learning Packages (“Tell Me More” and “Rosetta Stone”)58
With the rapid advancement of technology and the outbreak of the new generation of computer software packages, it seems plausible to shed more light on this issue in the realm of English language learning and teaching. To this end, the present study aimed at scrutinizing the EFL learners’ attitude towards a self-study program using two language training software packages called Rosetta Stone and Tell Me More. Sixty elementary EFL participants were selected randomly from a non-state high school. Then they were divided into two groups each learning English through one of the previously-mentioned packages. They passed a self-study three-week using the two software packages. After that, they were required to fill up a Likert-type questionnaire based on their learning experience. The twenty-seven-item questionnaire elicited participants’ attitudes towards this sort of self-study program. The collected data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Based on the descriptive statistics, the findings revealed that the attitudes of the participants towards each item were different, although for most items such as learners’ preference towards a self-study program, their ideas about the software packages graphics, the speech recognition system, the ease of use in terms of individuals’ basic skills etc. they reflected positive views towards the use of each of the software packages. In addition, the result of Mann-Whitney U test showed that there was not a statistically significant difference between elementary EFL learners in terms of their attitudes towards the two language learning software packages.
Key Words: Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL), Learners’ Attitude, Software Packages, English as a Foreign Language (EFL)
With the beginning of the era of technology and a whole raft of new language training software packages, it seems quite sensible to take a closer look at some of these attempts to enhance the quality and effectiveness of language learning and teaching. This is quite a fact that the advent of computer and following it the Internet has made the process of language learning easier, more convenient and even more enjoyable. In other words, technology has revolutionized diverse aspects of human life and as such language learning and teaching is no exception. The inclination towards the use of computer and multimedia facilities in the past two decades in the language education has been reported in the works of some researchers such as Salaberry (2001). The form of technology that is taken into consideration in the current study is the language training software packages.
Figura and Jarvis (2007) defined CALL as learners’ learning language in any context with, through, and around computer technologies. Egbert (http://www.iatefl.org.pl/call/j_key24.htm) (n.d.) also stated that CALL is the catalyst for new kinds of teaching and learning that enables learners to achieve their goals faster. It can be said that one of the final goals of CALL is to develop thinking skills in learners out of class environment. Apparently, CALL materials seem to be more appealing and promising owing to their capacity to integrate text, picture, sound, and animation. However, what makes a widespread research in this area arduous appears to be the difficulty in locating the learners using CALL materials.
It can be estimated that the use of computers as an asset to language learning and teaching commenced in the 1960s. As technology is subject to changes almost all the time, the definition of Beatty (2003) of CALL (computer-assisted language learning) that “any process in which a learner uses a computer and, as a result, improves his or her language” (p. 7) truly fits its nature. The field of CALL emerged in three various stages during its protracted history, Structural or Behavioristic CALL (1970s-1980), Communicative CALL (1980s-1990), and Integrative CALL (from late 20th up to 21st century).
As the first stage, behavioristic CALL was adopted as the part of the general field of computer-assisted instruction. As its name indicates, it was inspired by the behavioristic psychology clarifying repetitive language drills so called drill-and-practice (or drill-and-kill). The role of the computer was seen as a mechanical tutor that provided the opportunity to work at individuals’ own speed without getting tired. At that time a tutorial system called PLATO could mesmerize attentions with a central computer and terminals and featured extensive drills, grammatical explanations, and translation tests at various intervals (Ahmad, Corbett, Rogers, & Sussex, 1985).
The second stage, communicative CALL, came into existence at the time when behavioristic CALL was being rebuffed at both theoretical and empirical levels. It also synchronized the outbreak of PCs (personal computers) which proved to be more capable as far as individual work was concerned. Advocates of communicative CALL believed that computer-based activities should emphasize using forms in lieu of the forms themselves, teaching grammar implicitly rather than explicitly, encouraging and having learners produce authentic instead of prefabricated language, and using the language predominantly (Jones & Fortescue, 1987). Communicative CALL was pertinent to the cognitive theories maintaining learning as a process of discovery, expression, and development. Text reconstruction programs with the aim of discovering the patterns of language and meaning through unscrambling words and texts in the form of individual or group works as well as the simulation programs with simulated discussion and conversation allowing students to work in pairs or groups were on full swing. The dominant focus of most advocates of communicative CALL was the students’ interaction with each other while working with the computer.
Although the second stage of CALL seemed a greater success in comparison with the first, it was open to criticism. Critics slammed communicative CALL stating that computer is still being used in an ad hoc and disconnected fashion as a result; it “finds itself making a greater contribution to marginal rather than central elements” of language learning process (Kenning & Kenning, 1990, p. 90). It paved the path to adaptation of communicative language teaching theory in both theory and practice. Cognitive view of communicative language learning was leaving its place to a more socio-cognitive perspective that emphasized more language use in authentic social contexts. Approaches like task-based and content-based used to integrate learners into authentic language situations and also different language skills. As a result, the third stage of technology and language learning called Integrative CALL emerged. As stated before, this stage sought to integrate language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and also technology to language learning process. Simply put, students are exposed to technological assets as a constant process rather than isolated exercises every now and then.
1.0.1. Software packages to be investigated in the present study
One of the software packages to be examined in the current research is Auralog’s TELL ME MORE (American English). This package that was founded in Paris, France in 1987 is among the best-seller language self-study multimedia packages all over the world. The company is also famous for having a program called English for Kids with a 24-hour online adviser and also audio language programs compatible for MP3 players and iPods. As the authorities claim, the software package follows a communicative approach to language learning and teaching by way of providing authentic situations which covers not only all four main skills (listening, speaking, reading, writing) but also cultural values. It is said to be one of the pioneers that has integrated the most sophisticated speech recognition system available into the product. Auralog names this technology the S.E.T.S (Spoken Error Tracking System) which pinpoints incorrectly produced words and sounds.
One of the few software programs designed with an awareness of how multimedia can capitalize on the psychological processes of language learning is The Rosetta Stone. Indeed, because of this fact, Rosetta Stone is perhaps one of the more powerful learning tools on the market today. Its developers explicitly based their methodology on Krashen’s theories of natural learning. In their promotional flyer, they write: “the best model for learning a new language is the natural way in which we learned our native language. This idea has been espoused by a school of thought that emphasizes comprehension of spoken language as the first step to acquiring fluency. This is called ‘the comprehension approach’ or ‘the natural approach’.” The Rosetta Stone provides the learner with gradated comprehensible input, always pushing the envelope of the learner’s knowledge just a little above what they have just acquired. Their flyer reads: “The native language is learned by hearing simplified speech in a context which provides the cues that make this speech comprehensible. This context also provides immediate reinforcement to the child [The Rosetta Stone] works in the same way. It uses thousands of carefully selected pictures to create contexts where the meaning is clear. The program elicits the student’s response and gives instantaneous feedback, confirming the comprehension that takes place”. (Saury, 1998, p.6)
1.1. Theoretical Framework
The current study is based on Gardner’s (1985) socioeducational model of second language acquisition. The role of motivation in second language learning has been under research in Canada where there are two official language languages available. Gardner maintained that second language learners with positive attitude towards the language and culture of the language being taught learn more effectively. In addition, in earlier research Gardner (1959) found the strong influence of aptitude and motivation on second language learning.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Benson (2001) defined self-study language learning as the situation in which learners study languages on their own, primarily with the aid of teach-yourself materials. Self-instructed learners working outside of the target language context confront a difficult and lonesome task with high levels of learner drop-out (Jones, 1993; Umino 1999). In Nielson’s (2011) study, just in one phase, 119 participants of 150 dropped out of the program based on different reasons. Some participants listed the lack of time and technical support as the main justification for attrition.
One of the problems that can be stated in the area of language learning in a traditional way is that the data taught by a certain teacher in the classroom is not perpetual in learners’ memory. In other words, the contents that have been exposed to learners directly will be easily forgotten after a while.
An obvious advantage of self-study programs in contrast to the traditional class attendance courses is that students are not confined to a certain place and time. Self-study or self-instructed language programs has transferred the learning environments from classrooms to houses and workplaces. In this way, barriers to learning such as peer pressure and anxiety will be eliminated instead it leads to better providing of convenience flexibility, currency of material, customized learning, and feedback (Hackbarth, 1996).
Also as a comparison between traditional classrooms setting and online courses, Smith and Hardaker (2000) believe that online environment has the merit of promoting learner-centeredness, encouraging more participation on the side of the students and produces more in-depth and sensible interaction and discussion than a traditional setting does. Interaction in online environment cuts down on the anxiety students are confronted with in the face-to-face situation and it is considered to be less intimidating.
The use of technology and CALL amenities can balance students’ participation, cut down on the dominance of higher achievers by providing more chances for others. Also, the use of technology in classrooms leads to an increase of self-confidence and inclinations towards wider participation in the classrooms. Such facilities utilize animation, pictures, songs, videos, and so on that provide comprehensive input and catches learners’ attention and encourages them for more cooperation.
1.3. Significance of the study
One of the main issues to be addressed in studying language learning software packages is an apparent shortage of research in such an area. That is why Nielson (2011) stated that there is, however, research from related areas that suggests the most effective learning is not achieved by learners working alone, and that any materials designed as stand-alone, self-study solutions will have to compensate for this lack of interpersonal interaction. Benson (2001) believes that empirical investigations of self-instructed learners working without classroom or institutional support are scant. As a result, much of its justification has to come indirectly from general language acquisition theory or from classroom-based research (Jones, 1994).
There is bulk of hypotheses on the advantages of CALL, but the one that seems to be directly related to the present study is its positive effect on students’ attitude and motivation. As an instance, in the study of Chun (1994), the effect of CACD (computer-assisted classroom discussion) was compared with face-to-face class discussion. The results of the study revealed that CACD provided more opportunities for student-initiated discussion that a formal classroom discussion. In addition, CACD was more successful in getting students to produce more output regardless of their various personality types.
The aim of this study is to assess EFL learners’ attitude towards self-directed language learning. There has been large number of research in the field of CALL and technology-enhanced language learning while quite few of them shed light on the psychological aspect of learners’ experience. The present study tries to answer the question whether or not such an amalgam of technology and instruction without the presence of a teacher helps them learn a new language. Undoubtedly, technology plays an important role in today’s education but if it can be an alternative to a real teacher brings this issue into question.
1.3.1. Merits of the integration of technology in English language education
Several merits of the use of technology in the area of language education have been reported (Rost, 2002). One of such advantages is that it leads to autonomous learners meaning that they can be exposed to materials outside the classrooms. In this case, students can spend more time practicing especially when they are living in a non-English speaking country. Another advantage is that it is more economical in contrast to the old fashion way of education by cutting down on the costs of formal education.
Lee (200) in reply to the question why we should integrate computer into the education stated seven reasons a) it proves practices for students through the experiential learning, b) it offers students more the learning motivation, c) it enhances student achievement, d) it increases authentic materials for study, e) it encourages greater interaction between teachers and students and students and peers, f) it emphasizes the individual needs, g) it regards independence from a single source of information, and h) it enlarges global understanding.
Yet the other advantage of technology is its potential to cut down on anxiety amongst language learners. Ozerol (2009) conducted an experiment based on teachers’ perception towards CALL in eclectic schools in Turkey. Most of the participants (teachers) confirmed that technology lowers learners’ anxiety meanwhile it provides wider opportunity for communication. It can be added that the use of computers in the classrooms refreshes atmosphere, increases learner autonomy and leads to particular language development.
1.3.2. Drawbacks of the integration of technology in English language education
Whereas several merits regarding the incorporation of technology into language education have been stated here and in the other studies, yet there are still some sorts of shortcomings exists in this field. As an instance, Gips, Di Mattia, and Gips (2004) maintained a striking surge in the costs of education if it is the case. It appears to be against the nature of education that is to be a free-for-all process and not a costly one.
Another limitation of computers in the area of language education is the patchiness of language software packages produced so far. It implies that foreign or second language learning is crammed with startling situations which is currently impossible for a software package to understand and cope with. Simply put, it cannot play the role of a teacher in various situations. Dent (2001) mentioned the disability of computer to interact effectively due to different utilization of information by human and computer.
Another point concerning this issue is that learning a language with the help of computer in any forms like teaching aids or as a main source obligates a basic knowledge of computer to some extent. It means that training how to use a computer precedes language learning. As Roblyer (2003) correctly pointed out the benefits of computer technology for those students who are not familiar with computer are inexistent.
1.4. Research questions
1 – What are the attitudes of EFL learners towards two major language training software packages, namely, Rosetta Stone and Tell Me More?
2 – Are there any statistically significant differences between EFL learners in terms of their attitudes towards Rosetta Stone and Tell Me More?
1.5. Research hypotheses
1- There are not any statistically significant differences between EFL learners in terms of their attitudes towards Rosetta Stone and Tell Me More.
1.6. Definition of Key Terms
Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL): It is concerned with any process in which a learner uses a computer and, as a result, improves his or her language (Beatty, 2003).
Learners’ Attitude: It can be defined as what learners of English think and believe towards different materials.
This chapter provided a brief of issues pertinent to the area of CALL and especially self-study programs. First, an introduction along with the theoretical framework which the study is based on was presented. Then some general problems of the use of computer in language education were brought up. Significance of the study as well as research questions and hypotheses were clarified. Finally, some key terms were defined.
Review of the Literature
The present study is about EFL learners’ attitude and motivation towards the use of two self-study software packages called Rosetta Stone and TELL ME MORE. Background studies to CALL are quite vast as they trace back to the early 1960s. Areas such as autonomy of students in a self-directed or self-study course, the differences that lie among traditional and computer-enhanced courses along with measuring learners’ attitude and motivation have been discussed.
2.1. Autonomy and Self-study Programs
Due to a lack of empirical research in the area of self-study with the help of language training software packages, there is a need to take refuge to some other pertinent studies. According to Holec (1981), autonomy that is a condition argued to be beneficial to the language acquisition process does not necessarily come about as a result of self-study. Benson (2007) also is of the opinion that learners do not develop the ability to self-direct their learning simply by being placed in situations where they have no other options. What can be concluded is that autonomy is something that is directly related to learners’ conditions. Fernández-Toro (1999) believes that “for the learning experience to be successful, learners require appropriate support, not only in the form of learning materials (many of which are produced by teachers), but also advice and training. No resource center can operate effectively without the backup of adequate human resources” (p.7).
Littlemore (2001) reported the best function in some European universities which enjoy self-access language centers to be owing to the implementation of well-thought-out support, guidance, and training. She concluded that when these universities made use of self-access centers, the rate of satisfaction reduced drastically compared to the time when these centers were equipped with seasoned staff in order to promote language learning through advising, peer work, and other guided practice.
2.2. Language Training Software Packages
The effectiveness of language training software packages, their influence on learning and classroom usage were emphasized by means of scrutinizing cognitive processes and pedagogical approaches. To attain this objective, Saury (1998) built up a psychological framework for a sound evaluation of language learning software packages. She claimed that “Rosetta Stone is one of the few software programs designed with an awareness of how multimedia can capitalize on the psychological processes of language learning” (p. 6). She also maintained that Rosetta Stone enjoys “consciously decontextualized” (p. 6) content that enables learners develop their interlanguage and to see how language works. This claim was brought up years ago on the basis of natural approach to learning by Krashen.
Another experiment in the realm of self-study is the one by Murray (1999) on a simulated immersion software package called Á la rencontre de Philippe. The program has a story-line with various directions and the job of the learner is to answer the multiple-choice questions and comment on the main character’s (Philippe) behalf. Very similar to the results of Ulitsky’s work (2000), learners were autonomous and highly motivated and all of them used outside resources to do the tasks. The significant point to mention in this piece of work is that there were no learning outcomes to measure up the validity and quality of the program.
In a study done by Ulitsky (2000) on one specific language training software, some highly motivated and seasoned second language learners were under examination. The software packages called Destinos and French in Action were especially prepared in the University of Albany. The supplements of some quizzes and interactive exercises were also included in this research. Participants had the least experience in French and Spanish which were their second language. Surprisingly, all the participants who were 26 overall made use of outside resources to complete this self-study process.
2.3. Assessing Attitude, Belief, Perception and Motivation in CALL
As mentioned earlier, students’ attitude and motivation towards a somewhat unique type of language instruction called self-study using computer software packages are addressed. Based on these criteria, the US Department of Education (1995) reported the feeling of students about using technology by stating that they feel more nimble and self-oriented. A percentage of 70 students claimed that using computer has made their learning process more fun and interesting. Sivin-Kachala and Bialo (2000) reviewed 311 research studies on the role of technology in learning accomplishments. The results of the study revealed that technology-enhanced environments have positively affected students’ at-school performance as well as their attitude towards all subjects of study and boosted self-esteem.
Along with some factors like computer qualities and cultural values, research in the same area suggested teachers’ computer competence as interfering factor on their attitude towards technology. Francis-Pelton and Pelton (1996) focused the relationship between teachers, their attitude and technology approval by stating that ‘‘Although many teachers believe computers are an important component of a student’s education, their lack of knowledge and experience lead to a lack of confidence to attempt to introduce them into their instruction’’ (p. 1).Teachers’ computer background skill and experience has proved to have significant influence on their attitude in several studies (Berner, 2003; Na, 1993; Summers, 1990). The results of Al-Oteawi’s (2002) study displayed negative or neutral attitude of teachers who lack prior skill or experience in the area of computer. He further clarifies this notion by stating that such a thing would make them unable to make “informed decision” (p. 253).
Some scholars drew their attention to more abstract side of learning which is learner’s attitude in CALL programs. For example, Ushida (2005) conducted a research on students’ attitudes and motivation in second language learning in online language courses. Thirty participants enrolled in elementary French, elementary Spanish and intermediate Spanish along with teachers and language assistants in order to obtain contextual information. Students attended one class for 50 minutes per week. Every individual also practiced orally with the assistant teachers for 20 minutes every week. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected based on the background knowledge, attitude and motivation, descriptive data for learning environments, measures of learning behavior and course participation, and measures of outcomes. The results of the study revealed that students’ attitudes and motivation were almost positive and seemingly the same for both languages. Students’ attitude and motivation remained positive throughout the 15-week semester.
Brown (2006) reported two factors affecting learners’ experiences in a self-instructed language program. The first factor as she calls it, the locus of learning, depicts students’ belief about the one who controls the education process and affective strategies. The results of the study revealed that students with internal locus of learning are more likely to be successful in a self-study program than those with external locus of learning. Besides, students who made use of affective strategies proved to be more successful in a self-instructed program than those who did not.
A significant difference between the level of motivation and importance of the learning process for learners was reported by Gulten and Aydin (2010). Meanwhile the correlation between motivation and some other variables like obligatory and voluntary states, age, gender, grade, type of high school, educational background of parents, language learning time period and learners’ experience was not noteworthy enough. They set their objective to assess EFL students’ motivation in a cyber-environment CALL. The number of participants was 126 English language learners at Preparatory school of Inonu University in Turkey. The manner of data collection was via a questionnaire in order to obtain descriptive and correlational analysis.
Two Iranian researchers Ghalami Nobar and Ahangari (2012) did a study on the effect of computer-assisted language learning on Iranian EFL learners’ task-based listening skill and motivation. The number of 40 English as a foreign language (EFL) learners participated in this study at Islamic Azad University – Tabriz Branch. The manner of data collection was through the use of two two-credit conversation course and two intact classes which were selected randomly. The experiment part of the study consisted of access to the language lab by experimental group. Too, they had task-based listening comprehension materials and activities with comprehension questions three times a week via their e-mail. The results of the study displayed a gap between experimental and control groups. The experimental group outperformed the control group by getting higher average. As far as the motivation of the participants was concerned, the experimental group was more motivated than their counterparts in control group.
It is noted by Rogers (1995) that features of the novel technologies play an important role in people’s attitude and approval of the use of technology. According to him, these features are relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialibility. He claimed that technology is best perceived by users if they understand that innovation a) has technologically superiority over the old version b) their current practices is consistent c) is not convoluted and d) displays noticeable outcomes e) could be trialed before use. The researcher defined computer features as “the level of relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, and observability of the computers as perceived by high school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers in Syria’’. Due to the lack of experiment of computers by most teachers prior to school, the trialibility was not inspected. In another similar study by Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) relative advantage, compatibility and observability were proved to have positive effect on integration of technology into education while convolutedness was considered to be negative in such regard. Sooknanan (2002) contended that relative advantage, compatibility, and observability were the three factors to have relationship with teachers’ attitudes towards technology in Trinidad and Tobago. As far as the findings of the study concerned, no clear relation between complexity and teachers’ attitudes were noticed.