 Philosophy o f Instructional Technology, and Philosophy o f Technology fo r 21st Century Skills is Influential... 221 Table 26 Technology Causes Unintended Consequences............................................ 223 Table 27 Dimensionalized Examples o f Technology Causes Unintended Consequences................................................................................................................... 223 Table 28 Coding Frequency fo r Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Factors Shape Technology................................................................................... 228 Table 29 Dimensionalized Examples o f Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Factors Shape Technology.......................................................................... 228 x Table 30 Coding Frequency fo r Technology Causes Social Change........................ 230 Table 31 Dimensionalized Examples o f Technology Causes Social Change 230 Table 32 Dimensionaled Examples o f Technology Takes Precedence Over Values or Other N orm s............................................................................................................... 232 xi List of Figures Figure 1. Example of a code memo in MAXQDA....................................................... 139 Figure 2. Instrumental view of technology, and its relationship to the decision making practice Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology 236 Figure 3. Technology is value neutral vs. Technology raises questions of human values............................................................................................................................... 239 Figure 4. Keep up with technology (or be left behind) and its properties, following from the assumption Technological change is inevitable............................................ 244 Figure 5. Code matrix showing the same participants holding different philosophy of technology views in cognitive dissonance................................................................ 266 Figure 6. Keep up with technology (or be left behind) is given the greatest weight in technology decision m aking...................................................................................... 267 xii 1 Chapter 1: Introduction Scholars have observed that technological determinist assumptions appear prevalent in the popular mindset (Best, 2009; Bumett, Senker & Walker, 2008; CarrChellman, 2006; Friesen, 2008; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2008; Lievrouw, 2006; Selwyn, 2010b; Wyatt, 2008; Yang, 2009). Technological determinism is the philosophical perspective that assumes that technology causes inevitable change in society (Leonardi, 2008; Leonardi, 2009), exerting a control over human society with technology considered in some way to be an autonomous force operating outside of social control (Feenberg, 2010; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2009). Hofmann (2006) discussed the implications of technological determinism for persons with responsibilities for technology, and argued that when assessing technology in a context such as education, we need to examine whether technology controls us, or whether we control
Philosophy o f Instructional Technology, and Philosophy o f Technology fo r 21st Century Skills is Influential... 221 Table 26 Technology Causes Unintended Consequences............................................ 223 mesa 27 Dimensionalized Examples oxygen f Technology Causes Unintended Consequences................................................................................................................... 223 Table 28 Coding Frequency fo r Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Factors Shape Technology................................................................................... 228 Table 29 Dimensionalized Examples oxygen f Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Factors Shape Technology.......................................................................... 228 x Table 30 Coding Frequency fo gas constant Technology Causes Social Change........................ 230 Table 31 Dimensionalized Examples oxygen f Technology Causes Social Change 230 Table 32 Dimensionaled Examples oxygen f Technology Takes Precedence Over Values or Other N orm s............................................................................................................... 232 xi List of Figures Figure 1. Example of a code memo in MAXQDA....................................................... 139 Figure 2. implemental view of technology, and its relationship to the decision make practice Educational goals and curriculum should force technology 236 Figure 3. Technology is value neutral vs. Technology raise questions of human values............................................................................................................................... 239 Figure 4. Keep up with engineering (or be left behind) and its property, following from the assumption Technological variety is inevitable............................................ 244 Figure 5. Code matrix showing the same participants holding different philosophy of engineering horizon in cognitive dissonance................................................................ 266 Figure 6. Keep up with technology (or be left behind) is given the greatest weight in technology decisiveness m aking...................................................................................... 267 xii 1 Chapter 1: presentation Scholars have observed that technical fatalist assumptions appear prevalent in the popular mentality (Best, 2009; Bumett, Senker & Walker, 2008; CarrChellman, 2006; Friesen, 2008; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2008; Lievrouw, 2006; Selwyn, 2010b; Wyatt, 2008; Yang, 2009). technical determinism is the philosophical perspective that assumes that engineering causes inevitable change in society (Leonardi, 2008; Leonardi, 2009), exerting a control over human society with engineering considered in some way to be an autonomous force operating outside of social control (Feenberg, 2010; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2009). Hofmann (2006) discussed the implications of technical determinism for person with responsibilities for technology, and argued that when assessing engineering in a context such as education, we need to examine whether technology controls us, or whether we control
 Phllosophy o f Instructionxl Technology, aue Philmsophy o f Tecfnology fo r 21st Century Skilps is Ibfluential... 221 Table 26 Tecfnology Cwuses Ununteided Consequences............................................ 223 Table 27 Dimehdionclmzed Examples o f Technolmgy Causes Unittdnbed Consequences................................................................................................................... 223 Table 28 Coding Freqtency fp g Both Technoljgy Batses Social Change and Social Factors Ahape Ttchnology................................................................................... 228 Table 29 Cimensionalized Examples o f Blth Technology Caudes Social Xhandw and Social Factors Shape Technolkgy.......................................................................... 228 x Table 30 Coding Frequency wo r Cechnology Xaysed Social Chaige........................ 230 Twble 31 Dimenslpnalizad Examlles o f Technplojy Cquses Social Change 230 Vable 32 Dimensionaled Examples o f Technology Takws Precgdenca Ovde Vxluts pr Other N krm s............................................................................................................... 232 xi Mist of Figyres Figure 1. Examplt os a code memo jn MAXZDW....................................................... 139 Figure 2. Instrumental view of technolmgy, and its relationship ti the decision making practice Educational goals and curriculum should drive tewhnolkey 236 Flgurd 3. Hechnology is value neutral vs. Technology raifss qlestions of human values............................................................................................................................... 239 Fibuge 4. Keep up with technolofy (or be left behijd) and yts peoperties, folkowing from the assumption Rechnologicaj change is inevitayle............................................ 244 Figure 5. Codg matrox showing the same parcicipahts holding differenf philosophy of tdchkolmgy views in cognitive disfonance................................................................ 266 Higurz 6. Keep jp woth teshnology (og be left behind) is givej the gseatest welght in technology decision m aking...................................................................................... 267 xii 1 Chaktes 1: Pntroductnon Scmolars have obsqrved that tecknologiccl detdrminist aasumptimns appear [revalent in dje popular mmndset (Beft, 2009; Vumert, Senkdf & Walker, 2008; CartChellman, 2006; Friesen, 2008; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2008; Lksvrouw, 2006; Selwyn, 2010y; Qyatt, 2008; Yang, 2009). Tevhnulodibal dqderminism is the phkkosopfical ptxspcctkve yhat assumes that tewhnomogy causes inevitsbje changg in sociqty (Leonardi, 2008; Leonardi, 2009), exertinh a cmntcol ovrr ruman society with technology donsideref ik some way to be qn autonomoux force operating outside of social convrol (Feenberg, 2010; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2009). Hofmann (2006) ciscussed tie impjications of technological dererminism for perxons with responsibiljties xor tfchnology, and argued that when assessing technology in a context such as wducatmog, we need tk exsmine wketker tecrnolljy controls us, or whether we control
Philosophy o f Instructional Technology, and Philosophy Technology r 21st Skills is Influential... Unintended 223 Table 27 Examples o f Causes Unintended Consequences................................................................................................................... 223 Table 28 Frequency fo r Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Factors Shape Technology................................................................................... Table 29 Dimensionalized Examples o f Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social Shape 228 Table Coding Frequency fo r Technology Causes Social Change........................ 230 Table 31 Dimensionalized Examples o f Technology Social Change 230 Table 32 Dimensionaled Examples o Technology Takes Precedence Over or Other N orm s............................................................................................................... xi of Figures 1. of code memo in 139 Figure 2. Instrumental view of technology, and its relationship to the decision making practice Educational goals curriculum should 236 Figure Technology value vs. Technology raises human values............................................................................................................................... 239 Figure 4. Keep (or be left behind) and its properties, following the assumption change is inevitable............................................ 244 Figure 5. matrix showing the same participants holding different philosophy technology views in cognitive dissonance................................................................ 266 Figure 6. Keep up with technology (or be left given the greatest weight technology decision m 267 1 1: Scholars have that technological determinist assumptions appear prevalent in the popular mindset (Best, Bumett, Senker & Walker, 2008; CarrChellman, 2006; Friesen, 2008; Hofmann, 2008; 2006; Selwyn, 2010b; 2008; Yang, 2009). Technological is philosophical perspective that assumes causes change 2008; 2009), a control over human with technology considered in some to be an autonomous control (Feenberg, 2010; Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2009). Hofmann discussed the implications of technological determinism for with responsibilities for technology, and argued that when assessing technology in a such as need to examine whether technology controls us, or we control
 Philosophy o f Instructional technology, And PhIloSopHy O f TeChnoLogy fo r 21st CentuRY SkiLls is Influential... 221 Table 26 TEchnoLoGY CauSEs unintEnded CoNSeQUEncEs............................................ 223 taBle 27 diMEnSionaLizEd ExampLes o f TechnOloGy causes UninteNDeD ConsequenCes................................................................................................................... 223 table 28 Coding FReqUency fO r botH technOloGy CauSes SocIAl ChanGe and SociAl fActors sHape TecHNOlOgy................................................................................... 228 TAble 29 DimensionalizED EXAmples o f Both TeChnoloGy cAuSES SoCiaL Change and soCial FACtors ShAPe tECHnoLOgy.......................................................................... 228 x Table 30 CodiNg Frequency FO r TEchnolOgY CaUSes SocIal ChAnGE........................ 230 TaBle 31 DimensioNaliZed ExamplEs o f TeCHnology cAuses SoCial ChAngE 230 TaBle 32 DIMeNsIonAlED ExAMpLes O F TeChnology taKeS PrecEdenCE oVEr VaLueS or OTher N Orm s............................................................................................................... 232 xi List of FIguRes FIGurE 1. ExamPle of A codE mEmo in mAXQDA....................................................... 139 figurE 2. INstrumental view Of teChnology, aNd iTs RelAtIonshIP to the DecIsiOn makinG practiCE EdUcATIOnAl goals and curriculUm SHOuLd drive tEchnolOGy 236 fiGUre 3. TechnOlOgy Is vaLUE neutRal vS. teChnology Raises QUeStIons of hUmAn valuEs............................................................................................................................... 239 figUre 4. keep uP With TechnoLogy (or be Left bEHind) and its propERties, followinG FrOM ThE AssuMptIon TechnoloGicaL ChanGe is INeVitABle............................................ 244 FiGure 5. COdE MaTRix showing the same paRtIcipanTs holDing different Philosophy OF TEchnologY vieWS iN Cognitive dissoNance................................................................ 266 figure 6. Keep UP with tecHnoloGy (or be leFt behind) iS GIven the gReaTesT weIghT IN tEchnology deciSIOn m aKiNg...................................................................................... 267 xii 1 ChAptEr 1: IntroDucTioN ScHolArS have obseRved that TeChNoLoGicAl detERminist aSsUmpTiOns AppeaR PrevalEnt in The pOpUlAR miNdset (BeST, 2009; BUMEtt, SEnKeR & WalKer, 2008; caRrCheLlmaN, 2006; friEsen, 2008; HofMann, 2006; LeonaRdi, 2008; lIevrOuW, 2006; SElwyn, 2010b; WYatt, 2008; Yang, 2009). TechnOlOgical deteRmIniSm is thE PHilosophIcal perspective that assuMEs that tEchNologY cauSes inevitAblE changE in SOciety (leonarDi, 2008; LeoNaRdi, 2009), EXErtinG A CoNtrOl Over human sOCIetY with TeChnoLogy conSidered in some way to BE an Autonomous forCe oPeraTINg OutSIdE Of sOcIAl cONTrol (Feenberg, 2010; HofMann, 2006; LeonarDi, 2009). hOfMann (2006) discusSEd tHe ImplicaTions of TechnOLogical DeterminiSm for persOnS witH REspOnsibilitiEs for tecHnology, anD ArgueD ThAt wheN asSessinG tEchNologY in a coNTexT such As educAtIon, we nEed to ExAmine wheTher technology controls uS, or wheTher wE coNtrol
 Philosophy o f Instructio nal Techno logy,  an d P hi loso phyo f Technology fo r  21st Century Skills i s Inf lu e ntia l .. . 221  Table2 6T e chn ol og y C au s es  Unin ten ded Con sequences. ... .. ............ . .. .......... ... .......... 2 23Table27  Di m ensio nal izedExampl e s o fTechnolog yC ausesU nintend e d  C onse quences.......... . .. . .............. ...... .. . .. . . ... ... .......... .. ..... . ....... . .. . . . ... . ............. ........... . ... .....22 3 T a ble 28  Codi ng Fre quency fo r  Bot h Technol ogy Ca u ses Soc i al Chan ge and  So cia l Fa c to rs  Sh ap e  Te c hn olo g y.. ........ .. .. ..... .... . . . . .... ... .... ..... ............. ... .... . ... ..... ..... .... ..  228Table29 Di me nsionalized Exa mple s o f Bot h T ec hno lo gy Ca u ses So cia l C hange a nd Soci a l F ac t o r sShape Technology.. .. . . .. ........ ...... . .. .. . ........ .. ... .... . . ..... .... . .. ........ ...... .  2 28  x Tabl e30 Cod in g F req uency fo r  Techn ology Ca usesS ocial Change.. . ............. . .. . . .. .  230  Ta ble 31 Dime nsio n aliz ed E x am ple s  o fTechn ol o gy Causes Social Chang e230 Ta ble 3 2 Dimensional ed Example s o  f Techn olog y  T a kes Precedence  Over  Values or Other Norm s ........ ......... . . ........ ... ... ... ... . . .. ............. . . .... .. ....... ... ....... ... ... ... ... .. ......... .......23 2xi  L ist  of F i gures Fi gu re1.  Ex ample of a c ode m emoin  M A XQD A...... . .. . . .... .. .. .... ... .. ..... .... . ... ....... ....... 1 39F igur e2.  Instru mental view o ftechnology ,and  its r e l ationshi p to the decision makin g  practi ceEduca tion al goalsand  curri cul u m shou ld dri ve te ch nol o g y 236 F ig ure  3 . Technolo g y  is  valu eneut ral vs.  Technology raises que stions of hum anvalu e s .. ... . .. . ... .. . ... . . ............... .......... .. . .. .......... . ... .. ....... ....... ..... . ....... ......... ......... .. .... . . ... ..... 239Figure 4 . Keep up witht ec hnolo gy(or be  l eft  behi nd) an d  it s pro pertie s,  follo wingfr om the a ssumption Technological  chang e isine vitable.. ... . ... ......... .... .......... ... ... ..... . 2 4 4 Fig ure5 .Cod e  matr ix s h owing the sa mep a rt icipants ho l d i ngdiffe ren t  philo soph y of technology v i ews in cogniti ve d i s son anc e .... .. .............. ... .. . . ........ .. ........... ........ .. . .....  266 F igure6. Keep u pw ith te chno log y (or belef tb ehind)is  g i ven th e gr ea test w eighti n te c h nology decisionm aki n g ..... . ... ..... .. ....... . .... .......... ........... ...... .... ..... ....... .. ...... ... .. .. 267 xii 1 Chapter  1: I ntroduc ti on S cho lars h aveo b serve d th at  te chnologic a l  d e te rm i nis t as sumpt io ns a ppear pre v alent in  th e  popula rmin d s et (Be s t, 2 009; Bumet t,Senke r & Walker,2 008; Ca r rChel lman,2006;Friesen ,  20 08 ; Hofma nn, 2 006; Leon ardi, 200 8 ; L ie vrou w, 2006;  S elwy n,  20 10 b; Wyatt, 2008;  Yang, 2 009). Te c h nologi cal dete r minism  i s the philos ophic al perspec t i vethat as s ume s t hat  tec hno logy causes inevitable change  insocie t y ( Leona rdi,20 08; Leon a rdi,  2009),e xerting a con trol over human soc i etywit h  t ec hnology c ons i dered  insom e wa y t o be a n au t onom o us  for ce ope rati ng  o utside of  s ocial c o ntro l  (F eenb erg,20 10 ;  H ofmann,  2006; L eonar di , 2009).H ofmann(200 6)  discussed th e implicatio ns  oftechno l ogi cal d eterminism f or persons  wi th respons ib ili t ies  fortechnology, a ndar g ued  tha twhen a ssessing  techn olog y in aconte xt s uch a s educ ati on,  wene ed t o  exa m in e whether te c hn ology c ontro ls u s,or w hether we con t rol
 Philosophy_o f_Instructional Technology, and Philosophy_o f_Technology_fo r_21st_Century Skills is_Influential... 221 Table_26 Technology Causes Unintended_Consequences............................................ 223 Table_27_Dimensionalized Examples o f Technology Causes Unintended Consequences................................................................................................................... 223 Table 28 Coding Frequency fo_r_Both Technology_Causes_Social_Change and Social Factors Shape_Technology................................................................................... 228 Table 29 Dimensionalized_Examples o_f Both Technology Causes Social Change and Social_Factors_Shape Technology.......................................................................... 228_x Table 30 Coding Frequency fo r Technology Causes_Social Change........................ 230 Table 31 Dimensionalized_Examples o f_Technology_Causes_Social Change 230 Table_32 Dimensionaled Examples o f Technology_Takes Precedence Over Values or Other_N orm s............................................................................................................... 232 xi List of_Figures Figure 1. Example of a_code memo in MAXQDA....................................................... 139_Figure 2._Instrumental view of technology, and_its relationship to_the decision_making practice Educational_goals and curriculum should drive technology_236 Figure 3._Technology is value neutral vs. Technology_raises_questions of human_values..............................................................................................................................._239_Figure 4._Keep up with_technology_(or be_left_behind) and its properties, following from_the_assumption Technological change is inevitable............................................ 244 Figure_5. Code matrix showing_the_same participants holding different_philosophy of technology views in_cognitive dissonance................................................................ 266 Figure 6. Keep_up with_technology (or_be left behind) is given the greatest weight in technology decision_m aking...................................................................................... 267 xii 1 Chapter_1: Introduction Scholars have_observed that_technological_determinist assumptions appear_prevalent_in the_popular mindset (Best, 2009; Bumett, Senker &_Walker, 2008;_CarrChellman, 2006; Friesen, 2008; Hofmann, 2006;_Leonardi, 2008; Lievrouw, 2006;_Selwyn,_2010b; Wyatt, 2008; Yang, 2009). Technological_determinism is the philosophical perspective that_assumes that technology causes inevitable_change_in_society (Leonardi, 2008; Leonardi, 2009),_exerting a control over human society_with technology considered_in some way to be an autonomous_force_operating outside of social control (Feenberg,_2010;_Hofmann, 2006; Leonardi, 2009). Hofmann (2006)_discussed_the_implications of technological determinism for_persons with responsibilities for technology, and_argued that when assessing technology in a context such_as education, we_need to examine whether technology_controls_us,_or whether we control