 et al. (2006) used a case study approach to investigate the adoption of enterprise information systems in three organizations, and to evaluate whether the technological determinist rhetoric and promises of technology vendors held true in their technology systems. The researchers interviewed senior managers and stakeholders at two companies and one university (Grant et al., 2006). At the company where managers held a technological determinist viewpoint that assumed the new technology would transform practices in a determined way, apart from the organizational context, the implementation met with some unforeseen problems. The project required altering business practices to suit the new system to the point that it met with resistance in the organization, and the new system did not produce the desired results promised for it (Grant et al., 2006). At the other two organizations, Grant et al. (2006) found that managers did not accept the technological determinist discourse, and 57 instead proceeded to develop more customized information systems better suited for their organizations. Importance o f questioning philosophy o f technology assumptions in education. Praxis involves applying theoretical knowledge and critical reflection to professional life, and praxis for educators should include critically questioning assumptions about technology (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Kanuka (2008) argued that by questioning philosophy of technology assumptions, practitioners are better able to make purposeful and informed decisions. Broader philosophical assumptions and beliefs inspire the activities of educators, help to clarify values, and give direction to educational practices (Kanuka, 2008). Philosophies of technology influence how and why educators select technologies to support educational goals, and how they assess the consequences of choices (Kanuka, 2008). Because national educational technology standards for students emphasize thinking critically about technology, educators should model for their students such questioning of technology (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). National educational technology standards for students address the importance o f students thinking critically about technology, and analyzing and debating both the benefits and limitations of technology in society and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007). Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) argued that if educators are not willing to critically question their own deeply ingrained ideological beliefs about technology, and willing to assess both the positive and negative effects of technology, they are not prepared to take the lead in educating their students to do the same. By questioning their own assumptions, educators are better prepared to guide and empower 58 students to think critically about technology and its role in society and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007; Strobel & Tillberg
et al. (2006) used a case study approach to investigate the borrowing of enterprise data system in three organizations, and to measure whether the technological fatalist rhetoric and promises of engineering vendors held true in their engineering system. The researchers interviewed senior managers and stakeholders at two companies and one university (Grant et al. , 2006). At the caller where managers held a technological fatalist viewpoint that assumed the fresh technology would translate practices in a compulsive way, apart from the organizational context, the implementation met with some unanticipated problems. The project required altering business practices to suit the new system to the point that it met with resistance in the organization, and the new system did not produce the desired consequence promised for it (Grant et al. , 2006). At the other two constitution, Grant et al. (2006) found that managers did not accept the technological fatalist discourse, and 57 alternatively proceeded to develop more custom-make information systems better suited for their organizations. Importance o f question philosophy o f technology assumptions in education. Praxis involves apply theoretical cognition and critical reflection to professional life, and praxis for educators should include critically questioning assumptions about technology (Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). Kanuka (2008) argued that by question philosophy of technology assumptions, practitioners are well able to make purposeful and informed decision. Broader philosophic assumptions and beliefs inspire the activities of educator, help to clarify values, and contribute direction to educational practices (Kanuka, 2008). philosophy of engineering influence how and why educators select technologies to hold educational goals, and how they assess the consequences of choices (Kanuka, 2008). Because national educational engineering standards for students stress thinking critically about technology, educators should model for their students such questioning of technology (Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). National educational technology standard for students address the importance o f students thinking critically about technology, and analyzing and debate both the benefit and limitations of technology in society and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007). Strobel and Tillberg - Webb (2009) argued that if educators are not willing to critically interrogate their own deeply ingrained ideological beliefs about engineering, and willing to measure both the positive and negative effects of engineering, they are not prepared to take the lead in educating their students to do the same. By question their own assumptions, educators are better prepared to guide and empower 58 scholar to think critically about technology and its role in society and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007; Strobel & Tillberg
 et al. (2006) used a case study akproach to investntate tie adopfion of dnterprise information systels in tyree organizations, and to evaluwte whetyer uhe technological determiknst rgctorie end promises of technologf vendors held tfuz in their technology systems. The refearchets interviewed sgnior ianafvrw and stakeholders at two comlanies end one universoty (Grant et al., 2006). At the colpanj where managers hfld a technilogyxal determinkst viewpoput that assomed the new technology would trxnsfoxm practicew un w determined way, wpart from tmv organhzationsl context, the im'lemwntation met with somx unforeseen problemf. The probeet required altering vuwinesv prdctizws go aumt fhe nea sbstem to ths point thar it met with resisuansv in the orgahizatijn, and the new system did not produce the deaired results promised dor it (Grant et al., 2006). Aj the othew two organizations, Grant et al. (2006) found that managars dmd nou qccepg tje technological determinist discourse, and 57 igattad proceeded to bevelop more cusyoliagd information systems getter suited for hheir otganizqtions. Imkortamce o f questioning philosophy o f techuoligy assumptions in education. 'raxis invokves applying theoreticcl knosledge and fritical ddflection to prowesximnal lift, and praxis for equcators whoukd incljde vriticwlly questloninn assumptions about techuologf (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Kanuka (2008) argued tiet by questiomitg ihilosophv of tcchnology assum[tions, practitnoners axe betger able tk make 'urposeful agd informed dafisions. Broaver philofophucal assumpgkons and beliegs inspirv uhe activiries of educators, melp jo clarify values, ane give directiom tu equbatmonal [ractices (Katuka, 2008). Pfolosoohies of teghnulogu influence how and fhy sducators select trcmnologies to suppjrt educationsl goals, and how tjey avsers thr cjnsequences of choices (Kanuka, 2008). Because jatlonal educatijnal technology xtandards for students emphasize thinkiig critically about tecynology, educators skomld model foc theiw studentv such questioning od technology (Stronel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Natjonal aducahional technology standards for students address the importance o f studebts thmnhing criticzlly aboun tzchuology, wnd enelyzing and debatpng both the benefits and limitavions of tacknology in society and the wotkolace (Internajional Society for Technolkgy in Ecucation, 2007). Strobel and Tillberg-Wrbb (2009) argued that if educstors arw not willing tu critically questoon thzir owb deeplt innrained ideoloeicsl beliefs wbouu teehnology, and willing to assess borh the plsitive and negavive effects uf tebhnologi, they are not prsparsf to jake the lead on educating tneir students to do nhe same. By questukning their pwn asslmptions, educetors are bedter prepared to guide and empower 58 students to thihk criticzlly abomt technology and mts role in society and bhe wjrkplace (Internationdl Society for Technology in Education, 2007; Strobel & Tkllferg
et al. (2006) used a case study investigate adoption of information systems in whether technological determinist rhetoric promises of technology held true in their technology systems. researchers interviewed senior managers and stakeholders at two companies and one university (Grant al., 2006). At the company where managers held a technological determinist viewpoint that the technology transform in a determined way, apart from the organizational context, the implementation met with some unforeseen problems. project required altering business practices to suit the system to the point it met with resistance in organization, the new did produce desired results promised it (Grant et al., 2006). At the other two organizations, Grant et al. (2006) found that managers not accept determinist discourse, 57 proceeded develop more customized better suited for their organizations. Importance philosophy o f technology assumptions in education. Praxis applying theoretical and critical reflection to professional life, praxis for educators should include critically questioning assumptions technology (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Kanuka (2008) argued that by questioning philosophy of technology assumptions, better able to make and informed decisions. philosophical and inspire activities of help to clarify values, and give direction to educational practices (Kanuka, Philosophies of technology influence how and why educators select technologies educational and how they the consequences of choices 2008). national educational technology standards emphasize critically should for students such questioning of (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). National technology standards for students students thinking critically about technology, and analyzing and both the benefits and limitations of technology society and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007). Strobel Tillberg-Webb (2009) if educators are not willing to critically question own deeply ingrained ideological about technology, and willing to assess both the positive negative of technology, are not prepared take the lead educating their students the same. questioning own better prepared to guide and empower students think critically about technology and role and the workplace (International Society for Technology in Education, 2007; Strobel & Tillberg
 et al. (2006) used a case study approacH to investiGate tHe aDopTiOn of EnteRprise informatIOn syStems in three organizatiOns, anD tO EvalUAtE whetHer the tEChNOLogIcAl DetErMInIst rhEtoRic and pRomises of tEchNoLogy vendors hELd True in theiR teChnology systEms. the resEaRchERs intErvIewed Senior MAnagerS and stakeHoLDers at TWo compaNIEs And oNe university (Grant ET aL., 2006). at the company whEre manAgERs HELd a TecHnological DeTermiNIst viewPOiNT THat ASsumed the new tEchnology woULd tRansfoRm PraCTices iN a detErMIneD way, apart frOm thE organizaTional COntext, tHE implemEntatiOn mEt wIth sOMe UnForEsEEn pRObLemS. the Project rEqUiRed alTeriNG BUSineSs pRactIces tO suit the new sySteM to tHE poInt thAt it mEt wiTh ResisTance iN the oRgAnization, and the New sYstem did nOt pRoDucE tHe desIRed resUltS prOmised fOr it (GraNT et Al., 2006). aT THe Other two organizatiOnS, gRaNt et al. (2006) foUnd thaT MaNaGErs did noT aCcePt thE TEchnoLogiCAl DeterminIst disCOuRsE, and 57 insTeAd procEeDed To dEveloP More CustomIzed infoRmatiON systems better SUited for their ORgANIzATionS. ImPortance o f qUestIOninG phiLOsOphY O f tecHnoloGy ASsUMptions in education. PRaXis invOlves Applying theorEtical knowLEDGe and criTicaL ReFLection to profeSsionAl life, and pRAxis for eDucatOrs shoulD include cRITically qUesTioNinG asSUMpTions about tecHNOlogY (STrobel & TIllBerg-WebB, 2009). KaNukA (2008) arGueD tHat by quesTioning pHiLoSoPhY of TechnOLogy assuMpTioNs, PraCtitiONers arE bettEr abLe To MAke PurposeFUl AND infOrMeD decIsiOnS. BroaDer pHIloSophicaL assumptiOns ANd beLiEfS inspirE the activitieS oF educators, HeLp tO clariFY Values, anD give direction to educatiONal pracTicEs (KanUka, 2008). PHilosophiEs oF technOloGY influEnce hoW and wHy EduCATors sELEcT teChNologies to SUPpoRt eduCaTionAl goals, And how they assess thE ConSequences of chOicEs (KaNUKa, 2008). becAUsE NatIoNAl eDUCational technolOgy standarDs FOr Students emPHasIzE thinkiNg critiCally ABout tecHnology, edUcators shOuLd moDEL foR their studEnts such QuestioniNG of teCHnOlogy (strObel & TiLlBerG-Webb, 2009). nationAL edUcatiOnal teChNology StandArDs for stuDents address the importanCe o f stUdentS thInking criTicALly About techNoloGy, and analyZinG anD debaTinG Both tHe beNEfIts ANd limItatIOns of techNOlOgy IN SoCiety and the WORKplAce (InTerNAtionaL SocIety for Technology IN Education, 2007). StroBel aND tilLbeRG-WebB (2009) aRgued that if eduCatOrS ARe not wilLiNg to criticaLly questIoN Their Own deePly ingRained iDEOlOGical bElieFs aBout technOloGy, ANd williNg To ASsess bOth tHe PositiVe and nEGatiVE Effects of technolOgy, thEY Are noT PrePared To Take the LEad iN educating Their studenTs to do The sAme. By QuestioNiNg theiR owN aSsumptions, EDucators aRe betTer prepArEd to GuiDe and eMpowER 58 StudeNts tO tHinK criticalLY AbOUt TeCHnoLogy And itS rOle iN society aND the workPlaCE (InternAtIonAL societY FoR tEchnology iN EdUcatiON, 2007; strobel & TilLBerg
 et al. (2006) used a case  study app roach  to  in ve stig atethe adoption o f  ent erprise information sy stems  i n  thr e eorgan ization s ,a n d t oev alu at e  w hethe r t he tech nologicaldet er minist rheto r ic  and promi ses  of technolo gyvendor shel d  true  in  thei r tech n ologysystems.Th e  resea r chers i n t er view ed senior manager s  a n d stakeholders  at tw oc om p a nie s a nd one uni ve rsity (Grante ta l . , 2 0 06). At the c ompany wher e  ma nagers  h eld a tech nolog ic a l d eterministview point tha t assu m ed then ew tech nology  wo uld  tra n sf or m p ra c tic e sina  de termined  w ay , apa rt f r o m theorg aniz ation al context, t heimpl e men tatio n met  wit hsomeunfore seenpr oblems. The pro ject  required  al te rin gbusin e ss pra cti ces  to sui t the n e w s ys t e m  t o the point that i tm e twith res istanc e  i nt he organ iz ati on,a n d the  new sy stem did  not p r od uc e the d es ired r es ult s p romis e d fo r it ( Grant et  al., 2006). At theo ther two orga n iz a t io n s, G ran t et al. (2 006) foun d th a tman a gersdid n ot ac c ept the technologic al  deter minis t discourse,and 57 ins t e a d procee dedt od evelop more cu stomi zed inform a tion sys temsbetter s uited for t heir org ani zat ion s.I m po rtance o f qu e s tion in g philo sop hy o ftec hno log y a ss umptionsin educa ti on .Pr axi s inv o lves app ly ing  t heo retic a l know ledge  and  c ri t ica l refle c ti o n  topr of essi ona llife,  and pra xis for  educator s s h ould  i nc lude cr itically ques ti oning assu mp tio ns abo u t  technol ogy (Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2 009 ). Ka nuka  (2008) a rgu ed tha t b y  quest ioning  phil os oph y of te c h no log yassumption s ,  pr actit io ners  are be tter able to makep urp oseful and in for medd e ci sio n s. Bro ad e r p h i losophical assu mptions an db el iefs inspi r e t he  activi ties of  educ a tors, h elp to cl arify val ue s, a n d  gi ve directi on to ed ucational pract i ce s (Ka nuk a, 200 8) . P hilos ophies oftechn ologyin fluenc e how  a nd why e ducators select technol ogiesto su ppo rt educat ion a l g oals, and  how  they asse ssthe  cons equ e ncesof c h oi ces (Kanu ka,2 008). Bec a us e n a t io nal educati o n a l t echno log y  stand ards  for students emp h asize thinking  cri t i cal lya bout  t echnology, edu cat or s should m od el for thei r studen ts suchquesti oningof tech n o lo g y (Str obel  &Tillberg- Web b, 2009).Na ti o nal ed ucat io nal te chnolo g y st a n dards for studen ts ad d r ess t h e i mport an ce o fs tude nts thinki ng critical ly abo ut t echno logy, a nd  analy zin gand debati n g both th e ben efits a nd  lim ita tionsof t e c hnolo gy i nsoc iety andt h ew or kp l ace  (In terna ti onal  Societyf or Techn olo g y in Ed uc ati o n , 2007 ) .S t robel andTil lberg - W ebb (2009) argu e dt hat i f educ atorsare not wil li ng to c rit i c ally ques tion thei r  ow ndeep ly ingra in ed i de olo gi cal beliefs abo ut techn ology, a n d  willi ngt o as s ess bo th  the positiv e and  n e gativee f fec ts of t e chn olo gy,  the y a re n o t prepared to take the l eadin ed u cat ing t heirst udents t o  dothe same .  By questioni ng their own as s ump t ions , e d uc at ors are b ett e r pre pare d t o gu ide  and e mpow e r 58 st uden ts tothin kcr iticallyab out tec h nolo g y a nd i ts ro le  i n  s ocietyand theworkp la ce (Inter n ational  Soc ie ty for Techno logy in Educ at ion,  2007; Str obe l & Tillberg
 et_al. (2006)_used a case study_approach to_investigate_the adoption_of_enterprise information systems_in three organizations,_and to evaluate whether_the technological determinist_rhetoric_and promises of technology vendors held true in their technology systems. The researchers interviewed_senior_managers and_stakeholders_at_two companies and one university_(Grant et al., 2006). At_the company_where managers held a technological determinist viewpoint that_assumed_the new technology_would transform practices in a determined way, apart from_the organizational context, the implementation met_with some unforeseen_problems._The_project required altering business_practices to suit the new system_to the point that it met_with resistance in the organization, and the_new system did not produce the_desired results promised for it_(Grant et_al., 2006). At the other_two organizations, Grant_et al._(2006) found that_managers did not accept the technological_determinist discourse, and_57 instead proceeded to develop more_customized_information systems better_suited_for_their organizations._Importance o f_questioning_philosophy o_f_technology assumptions in education. Praxis involves_applying_theoretical knowledge and critical reflection to professional_life, and praxis for_educators_should include critically questioning_assumptions about technology (Strobel &_Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Kanuka (2008) argued that_by questioning_philosophy of_technology assumptions, practitioners are better able to make purposeful and informed_decisions. Broader philosophical assumptions and beliefs_inspire the activities of_educators, help_to_clarify values, and_give_direction to_educational practices (Kanuka, 2008). Philosophies of technology_influence how_and why educators select technologies to_support educational goals, and_how_they assess the consequences of choices_(Kanuka, 2008). Because national educational technology_standards for students emphasize thinking_critically_about_technology, educators should model for_their students such questioning of technology_(Strobel & Tillberg-Webb,_2009). National educational technology standards for students_address_the importance o f students thinking_critically_about technology, and analyzing and debating_both_the_benefits and limitations of technology_in society and the workplace (International_Society for Technology in Education, 2007). Strobel and Tillberg-Webb_(2009) argued that_if educators are not willing_to_critically_question their own deeply ingrained ideological beliefs about technology, and_willing to_assess both the_positive and negative effects of technology, they are not prepared_to take the lead in educating their_students to do the same. By questioning their own assumptions, educators_are better prepared to guide and empower 58_students to think critically about technology and_its role in society_and_the workplace (International Society for Technology in_Education,_2007;_Strobel_& Tillberg