 the greatest weight in technology decision making. In seeking to understand this surprising result, we may interpret that there is philosophical tension and cognitive dissonance between the philosophy of technology perspectives Technology is a tool and Technological change is inevitable. Figure 6 depicts a substantive theory surrounding Keep up with Technology (or be left behind). 267 Technological optimism Technology is a tool (instrumental view of technology) Technological change is inevitable Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind) Figure 6. Keep up with technology (or be left behind) is given the greatest weight in technology decision making. The figure depicts two broad philosophy of technology perspectives, Technology is a tool (instrumental view of technology, and Technological change is inevitable, in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situated within Technological optimism. Two approaches to educational technology decision making are shown in cognitive dissonance with each other, and linked with their respective parent philosophy. The core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind shows) emerges as the primary concern of leaders as they deal with their perceived experience o f the inevitability of technological change. The core category is depicted as holding a greater relative weight. The figure depicts the two broad philosophy of technology perspectives in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situated within Technological optimism. The two approaches to educational technology decision making, Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up with technology (or be left behind), are 268 shown in cognitive dissonance with each other, and linked with their respective parent philosophy. The core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind) emerges as the primary concern of leaders as they deal with their perceived experience of the inevitability of technological change. While technology leaders emphasized that educational goals and curriculum drive technology decision making, it is evident the core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind) influences technology leaders in a powerful way. The researcher concludes based on the results of the qualitative study that among the participants in this study, the core category carries the greater philosophical weight in technology decision making. The core phenomonon is also affected by the viewpoint of technological optimism, which is a philosophical (Vermaas et al., 2011) and ideological (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009) perspective through which leaders respond emotionally to technological change in a positive way, through a response of advocacy for technological change, with new technology being given the benefit of the doubt. Employing the Corbin and Stra
the greatest weight in technology decision devising. In try to understand this surprising result, we may interpret that there be philosophical tension and cognitive noise between the doctrine of technology perspectives Technology is a tool and Technological variety is inevitable. Figure 6 depicts a substantive theory besiege Keep up with Technology (or be left behind). 267 Technological optimism Technology is a tool (implemental view of technology) Technological variety is inevitable Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology core class Keep up with engineering (or be left behind) Figure 6. Keep up with technology (or be leave behind) is given the greatest weight in technology decision devising. The figure depicts two broad philosophy of technology perspectives, Technology is a tool (instrumental view of technology, and technical variety is inevitable, in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situated within technical optimism. Two approach to educational technology decision devising are shown in cognitive dissonance with each other, and linked with their respective parent doctrine. The core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind shows) emerges as the primary concern of leaders as they deal with their perceived experience oxygen f the inevitability of technical change. The core category is depicted as holding a greater proportional weight. The figure depicts the two broad philosophy of technology perspectives in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situate within Technological optimism. The two approach to educational technology decision devising, Educational goals and course of study should drive technology, and keep open up with technology (or be left behind), are 268 shown in cognitive dissonance with each early, and linked with their respective parent philosophy. The core class Keep up with technology (or be left behind) emerges as the chief concern of leaders as they deal with their perceive experience of the inevitability of technological change. While engineering leaders emphasized that educational goals and curriculum drive technology decision making, it is evident the core category continue up with engineering (or be left behind) influences technology leaders in a powerful way. The researcher concludes establish on the results of the qualitative study that among the participants in this sketch, the core category carries the greater philosophical weight unit in technology decision making. The kernel phenomonon is also affected by the viewpoint of technological optimism, which is a philosophical (Vermaas et al. , 2011) and ideological (Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009) perspective through which leaders respond emotionally to technological variety in a positivist way, through a response of advocacy for technological change, with new technology being given the benefit of the doubt. Employing the Corbin and Stra
 thf greatest weight in tecmnology decision making. In sesking to understand this surprising cesuot, we may interpret that thdre is phplosophicql ttnsion and cognitmbe dissonance netwezn the philosophi of technolmgy perspectivas Tzchnology is a tool and Technologicaj changr ls inevitable. Siguge 6 delpcus a substantive theory surroundihg Keep up with Techmology (or be left behind). 267 Hechjological optimism Technology is w tool (instruoental view of technolkgy) Technological change is inexitabke Educatiinql hmals and cucricullm should driyv technmlogy cpre category Kcep u' wirh technology (or be lxft behind) Figure 6. Kgep up witv cechnology (or be left bwhind) is civev thd gdeeteat weihht in technomogy decisiin making. The figurt dqiocts two brozd phijofophy of technology perspectives, Technonogg is a tool (instrumentao view of technology, wnd Technjlogical change is inevitable, in cognitive dissondnce xigh tagm otfwr, and situated within Technological optimism. Trk spiroaches to educabional technology cefixyon making arg shown in cognitive dissonajce witr eacy other, agd lonked with their respective parent philjwophy. The core catzgory Keep u' with techmology (or be left behinb showa) emerges ad the prijxry concern of ldadvrs ds they deal with their pewceived eeperiznce o f the inevieability ov tecmtological change. Tje cote catagory is dfpicted as holding a greater relative weight. Jhe ficure depncts tme two broad phylosophy of teehnology persoectives ih cognivive dissonagce with each lther, and sivuated wiehin Tecynologizxl optimism. Thr two appgocches to wducational technokogi secision making, Edoxational goals ana ctrgicnlum fvould drive dechvoluby, ana Keep up wlth tecnnology (or be left bahins), are 268 shown in cobnltive diswonance rith each othrr, and linked with theic respxctive patent philosophy. The core categody Keep uo wlth technologr (or be left behnnd) emerges as the primary concern of leeders as they deal with their perceived exkerlence of the inevytability of technological chqnge. While technokogy leaders emphasizsd thad edufational goals and curriculum drive technology decision making, it is evidwnt thx sore categody Krep ui wnth technjlogb (ur be left behinc) influences technology leaders in a pofexful way. The researcher conclidds based on tfe results of the qualitztive stidy that among the participants in this study, the core gategory xarriss the greeter philosophical wright nn tecynology declsion making. Tfe vove phenomojon ms clso affected by the viewpoint of technillgical optimism, xhich is a pmiuosopgical (Dermaas et al., 2011) ahd isfologkcal (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009) perspective through wrich leaders rtspond emotionakly to nechnological change in d positive way, through a response of advocacy for tgchnologicam change, xith new technppogy being given the bcnefie of the doubt. Emplofing the Corbin and Stra
the greatest weight in technology decision making. to this surprising we may interpret and dissonance between the of technology perspectives is a tool and Technological change inevitable. Figure 6 depicts a substantive theory surrounding Keep up with Technology (or left behind). 267 Technological optimism Technology is a tool (instrumental view of technology) change inevitable goals curriculum should drive technology core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind) Figure 6. up with technology (or be left behind) is the greatest weight in decision making. The figure depicts broad of technology Technology a (instrumental view of and Technological change is inevitable, in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situated within Technological optimism. Two to educational making are in dissonance each other, and their respective parent philosophy. The core with technology (or be left behind shows) emerges the primary of leaders as they deal with perceived experience o f the inevitability of technological The core category is depicted as holding a greater relative weight. The figure depicts the philosophy of technology perspectives cognitive dissonance with other, situated Technological The two to educational technology decision making, Educational goals and curriculum should drive and Keep up with technology (or be left behind), are in dissonance with each and linked with their parent The core category Keep technology be as primary of leaders as they with their perceived experience of inevitability of technological change. educational goals and curriculum drive technology decision making, is evident the core category Keep up technology (or be left behind) influences technology leaders in a powerful way. researcher concludes the results of the qualitative study that among participants in this study, core category carries the greater philosophical weight in technology making. core phenomonon also affected by viewpoint of technological which is a et al., and (Strobel perspective through which leaders respond emotionally technological in a positive way, through response for technological change, with new technology being given the benefit of the doubt. Employing the Stra
 the greatest weight in technoLogy decisiOn makIng. in sEeKing To unDerstand this suRPrisIng result, we may interpreT that ThERe is PHiLosopHical teNSiON And CoGnItiVe DIsSonanCe bEtween tHe philosopHy oF tEchnology perSPeCtives TechNolOgy is a tool anD TeChnoloGiCal CHange Is iNevitAble. FiGUre 6 depIcts a subsTaNTive thEOry surrOUNdIng KEep up with TechnoloGY (oR Be left behind). 267 TeChnoloGiCAl OPTimIsm technology Is A tool (INstrumeNTaL VIEw oF Technology) TecHnological cHAngE is ineViTabLE EducaTionaL gOAls And curriculUm shOuld drive TechnoLOgy core CAtegory keep up WitH teChnoLOgY (oR be LeFT beHInD) FiGUre 6. keep up wiTh TeChnolOgy (oR BE LEft bEhiNd) is Given The greatest weIghT in tEChnOlogy DecisIon mAkIng. ThE figurE depiCtS two broad philosOphy Of technolOgy PeRspEcTives, tEchnolOgy Is a Tool (insTrumentAL viEw OF TEcHnology, and TechnoloGiCAL cHange is iNevitaBLe, In COgnitive DiSsoNancE WIth eaCh otHEr, And situaTed witHIn teChnologIcAl optiMiSm. TWo aPproaCHes tO educaTional teChnolOGy decision makiNG are shown in coGNiTIVe DIssoNanCe with each oTher, ANd liNked WItH thEIr resPectiVe PArENt philosophy. The core CaTegory keep uP with technoloGy (or be left BEHInd shows) EmerGEs AS the primary conCern oF leaders as THey deal wIth thEir perceIved experIENce o f the IneVitAbiLitY OF tEchnological cHANge. THe Core catEgoRy is depIctEd aS hoLdiNg A greater rElative wEiGhT. THe FigUre dePIcts the tWo BroAd PhiLosopHY of tecHnoloGy peRsPeCTivEs in cogNItIVE disSoNaNce wIth EaCh othEr, anD SitUated wiThin TechnOloGIcal OpTiMism. The Two approaches To EducationaL tEchNology DECision maKing, Educational goals and CUrriculUm sHould DrivE technoloGy, aNd Keep Up wITh techNology (Or be lEfT beHINd), are 268 SHOwN in CoGnitive disSONanCe witH eAch oTher, and Linked with their resPEctIve parent philOsoPhy. THE CoRe cATeGOry keEP up WITh technology (or bE left behinD) eMErGes as the prIMarY cOncern oF leaderS as thEY deal wiTh their peRceived exPeRienCE Of tHe inevitabIlity of tEchnologiCAl chaNGe. while TecHnologY lEadErs emPhasizED thAt eduCationAl Goals aNd curRiCulum driVe technology decision makIng, it iS evidEnt The core caTegORy KEep up with TechNology (or be LefT beHind) iNflUEnces TechNOlOgy LEaderS in a POwerful waY. thE reSEArCher concludES BAseD on thE reSUlts of The qUalitative study thAT among the partiCipaNTS in ThiS StudY, tHe core category CarRiES The greatEr PhilosophicAl weight In TEchnoLogy deCision Making. THE CoRE phenoMonoN is Also affecTed By THe viewpOiNt OF technOlogIcAl optiMism, whICh is A PHilosophical (VermAas et AL., 2011) And idEOloGical (stRobel & TiLLberG-Webb, 2009) perspEctive throuGh whicH leaDers rEspond eMoTionalLy tO tEchnologicAL change in A posiTive way, ThRougH a rEsponsE of aDVOcacy For tEcHnoLogical chANGe, WItH nEW teChnoLogy bEiNg giVen the benEFit of the DouBT. EmployInG thE cOrbin aND STRA
 the greatest weight in te chnology d ecisi onmak in g. I n se eking to under s tand  this surprising resul t, we  m a y in t er pretthat th e re i s p hi lo sop hi c al  tens ion  and co gnitive di sso na nce betweent he  philosoph y o f technology  pe rspect iv esT echno log y isa tool and Te chnologic al change is inev i t ab le.Figure 6 depictsa  s u bstantive theo ry sur ro u nd i n g K eep  up with T ec hnolo g y (or b e  l e f t  be h ind). 267 Tec hnologicalo pti mism T ec hno l ogy is  a to ol (in strumentalview  of techn ology) Technol o gical c hangeisine vita b le  E duc at i ona l  g oal s  an d curric ul um  shou ld d r i v e  tec hno logy  core  category Kee p u p wi t h t echno logy(orbe  left  behin d) Fi gu re 6. Keep up w ithtechnolog y ( or  be  l eft b e hind)isgiv en thegreates t  we ig h t in  technology decisi on m ak ing. The  figur e  d ep i cts twobr oad  phi l o sophy  oft ec hnologyperspe c ti ve s, Tech no logy i sa t ool  (ins t rume ntal v iew of t echno l ogy, and Techn o logical chang e  i s in e vita ble , in cognit ived isso nanc e  w ith eachother ,a nd situated within Tec hn ologic al op timism. Two a pproachest o educatio nalt ec h nology decisio n mak ing are sh o wn in co gniti ve disso nance wit h each oth er,  an d l ink e d  w ith their res p e ctiv eparentphi losophy . T hecor e c at egory Kee p up wit hte ch no log y (or be leftbe hin dsho ws) e m ergesas th e pr im ar y  co ncern o f  l e a ders  a sthey  de al  with  the i r p erceive d experie nce o fth einevita bility of tec hn ological c ha nge . Thec o re categ ory is depicted as hold i ng a gr eat er re lati ve weight . T he fig ure depict s thetwo b ro adp h iloso p h yofte chnology p e r spe ctive sin c ognitiv e dissonance withe ach  other, and s itu ated w it hin Te c hno lo g ica l optimism. The t wo approac he s  t o educatio n alte chnolog y decis ion m a king, E ducationa l goals a nd  cur r i cul um shoulddrive te chnology, and K e ep  up w ith  techn ol ogy  (orbe lef t  be hind) , are26 8 show n inco gnitivedissonance with each ot her, a nd li nke d with th eir res pective p aren t philosop hy.  Th e cor e c a tegor y Ke e pupw ith t echn o logy (orb elef t be hind) emerg e s asthe p rim a ry con cern  of leaders as th e y deal with th eirp e rce ive d  exp er ience of the i nev it a b ility of  t echnologica l change .W hiletechno logy l eaderse m ph a sizedthat  ed ucational  go al s  and cu rr ic u lum dr ivete chnolo gy dec i sion m aking, it is evi dentt h e cor e  ca tegor yKeep up with  technolog y (or be le ft beh ind)  infl uenceste chnolo gyle aders in a powerfulway.The res ea rche r c onclud es b a s ed on  the  r esu lts of th e qu a li ta t ive  stu dy th at  amo ng the pa r ticipant s i n  this s tu dy, t he cor e  c a t egory carr ies  theg r eater phil o soph i ca l  weig ht intechno logy de c isi on  making . T h e  core phe nomonon i s  al so  aff ected by  t he v ie wpo in t of technologi cal opti mism, wh i c h is a  ph i loso p hical(V ermaas et al ., 20 11 )  and id e o log ical (S t rob el& T illb erg -Web b , 2009) perspective thro ughwhich lea dersrespo nd  emotion a llyto techn o logical chang e in a positive way ,  thr oug h  a  r esponse o f a d vocac y fo r t echn olo gica l chan g e, w i th  new  techn olog ybe ing given  t he bene f it o f  th e do ubt.Em pl o yi ng theCorbin a nd St ra 
 the_greatest weight_in technology decision making._In seeking_to_understand this_surprising_result, we may_interpret that there_is philosophical tension and_cognitive dissonance between_the_philosophy of technology perspectives Technology is a tool and Technological change is inevitable. Figure_6_depicts a_substantive_theory_surrounding Keep up with Technology_(or be left behind). 267_Technological optimism_Technology is a tool (instrumental view of technology)_Technological_change is inevitable_Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology core category_Keep up with technology (or be_left behind) Figure_6._Keep_up with technology (or_be left behind) is given the_greatest weight in technology decision making._The figure depicts two broad philosophy of_technology perspectives, Technology is a tool_(instrumental view of technology, and_Technological change_is inevitable, in cognitive dissonance_with each other,_and situated_within Technological optimism._Two approaches to educational technology decision_making are shown_in cognitive dissonance with each other,_and_linked with their_respective_parent_philosophy. The_core category Keep_up_with technology_(or_be left behind shows) emerges as_the_primary concern of leaders as they deal_with their perceived experience_o_f the inevitability of_technological change. The core category_is depicted as holding a greater_relative weight._The figure_depicts the two broad philosophy of technology perspectives in cognitive dissonance_with each other, and situated within_Technological optimism. The two_approaches to_educational_technology decision making,_Educational_goals and_curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up_with technology_(or be left behind), are 268_shown in cognitive dissonance_with_each other, and linked with their_respective parent philosophy. The core category_Keep up with technology (or_be_left_behind) emerges as the primary_concern of leaders as they deal_with their perceived_experience of the inevitability of technological change._While_technology leaders emphasized that educational goals_and_curriculum drive technology decision making, it_is_evident_the core category Keep up_with technology (or be left behind)_influences technology leaders in a powerful way. The researcher_concludes based on_the results of the qualitative_study_that_among the participants in this study, the core category carries_the greater_philosophical weight in_technology decision making. The core phenomonon is also affected by_the viewpoint of technological optimism, which is_a philosophical (Vermaas et al., 2011) and ideological (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb,_2009) perspective through which leaders respond emotionally to_technological change in a positive way, through_a response of advocacy_for_technological change, with new technology being given_the_benefit_of_the doubt. Employing_the Corbin and_Stra