 f using a new 77 technology (means), such as a newer course management system or the hottest wireless device, than seriously considering the ultimate aims o f its use and its consequences" (p. 33). The instrumental view of technology's approach to technology as neutral with regard to values is referred to as the neutrality thesis (Vermaas, 2011). The position of technology as neutral with regard to values assumes that there are no inherent moral implications in using technology (Vermaas, 2011). The philosopher o f technology Feenberg held that one of the major implications of the neutrality thesis is that it assumes the technology tool has no ability to control, that the user is always in control o f the technology tool (Jackson, 2010). A problem with the instrumental view with regard to educational technology is that seeing technology as value neutral may interfere with discerning how technologies raise ethical considerations, and we may fail to recognize how some technology decisions can be value laden (Amiel & Reeves, 2008; Consortium for School Networking, 2011; Hofmann, 2006; Lowrance, 2010). Educational technologies are interconnected in an integral way not only with educational goals, but also with economic issues, political agendas, and social issues that call for considering axiological factors (Amiel & Reeves, 2008). Amiel and Reeves (2008) argued that a new critical approach to educational technology research is needed that places priority on axiology, with values and principles directing a proper focus on how educational technology can be a means to achieving educational ends. Martin Heidegger and questioning technology. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger proposed a philosophy of technology that has been considered by many 78 scholars to have been the most influential of all (Kaplan, 2009b; Lewin, 2010). Western (2004) asserted that philosophical insights about technology influenced by Heidegger's thinking are central to philosophical debate on innovative educational technology. Heidegger (2009) conducted an examination o f the essence o f technology by considering technology from an ontological perspective. Heidegger recognized that technology is commonly viewed using an instrumental definition that sees technology as a means to achieve other human ends (Heidegger, 2009). However, after proceeding to examine technology using the four causes in Aristotle's theory o f causality, Heidegger concluded that the essence of technology goes beyond mere means, and that technology involves more than human doing (Heidegger, 2009). Heidegger examined how the Greek philosophers understood technology (techne in the original Greek), and held that techne is a mode of knowing with ontological significance (Brogan, 2007). Heidegger
f using a new 77 technology (means), such as a raw path management system or the hottest wireless device, than seriously study the ultimate aims o f its manipulation and its consequence " (p. 33). The instrumental view of technology's approach to engineering as neutral with regard to values is refer to as the neutrality thesis (Vermaas, 2011). The position of technology as neutral with respect to values assumes that there are no implicit in moral implications in using technology (Vermaas, 2011). The philosopher o f engineering Feenberg held that one of the major implication of the neutrality thesis is that it assumes the engineering tool has no ability to control, that the user is always in control oxygen degree fahrenheit the technology tool (Jackson, 2010). A problem with the instrumental view with regard to educational technology is that seeing technology as value impersonal may interfere with discerning how engineering lift ethical considerations, and we may fail to recognize how some technology decision can be value laden (Amiel & Reeves, 2008; Consortium for School Networking, 2011; Hofmann, 2006; Lowrance, 2010). Educational technology are interconnected in an integral direction not only with educational goals, but also with economic issues, political agendas, and social issues that predict for considering axiological factors (Amiel & Reeves, 2008). Amiel and Reeves (2008) argued that a new critical overture to educational technology inquiry is need that places priority on axiology, with values and principles aim a proper focus on how educational technology can be a means to achieve educational ends. Martin Heidegger and interrogate technology. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger proposed a doctrine of technology that has been considered by many 78 scholars to have been the most influential of all (Kaplan, 2009b; Lewin, 2010). Western (2004) asserted that philosophic insights about technology influenced by Heidegger's thinking are central to philosophic debate on innovative educational engineering. Heidegger (2009) conducted an examination o f the essence o f technology by view technology from an ontological perspective. Heidegger recognized that technology is commonly viewed using an instrumental definition that see technology as a means to achieve early human ends (Heidegger, 2009). However, after proceeding to examine technology using the four causes in Aristotle's theory oxygen f causality, Heidegger concluded that the essence of technology goes beyond mere means, and that technology involves more than human doing (Heidegger, 2009). Heidegger probe how the Greek philosopher understood technology (techne in the original Greek), and held that techne is a mode of knowing with ontological significance (Brogan, 2007). Heidegger
 f ksing a new 77 technology (oeans), such as a newer rourse janagemevt system or the hottest wirxlesw devuce, than seriously conridering nhe ultimqte eims o f its use and its consesmencev" (p. 33). The instrukental vief of technologf's a'proach to technology as neutral witr regarc ho values is rgferrtd eo aa the neutrality thesis (Vermaas, 2011). Tge posiuion of technology as neutral with regard to valkes assumes that tjere are no inhqeent moral ioplications in using tgchnology (Vermaas, 2011). The philosophdr o y technologi Reftberg held vhat oge of the mampr impnicatioms of the neutvalitb thwsis is that it assumxs the technology tojl has no ayility to control, thar rhe uver hs auqayr ih ronfrol o f vhe technolkgy tool (Jaxkson, 2010). A problem wiuh eye instrumentzl vier rith regard to educational technology iv tgat seeing technology aw value neutral may ijterfere rith discerning how technologies raise ethical cotsidecagiouw, and qe may fail to recognize how some technology desjsooks can be value jaden (Amiel & Gerdes, 2008; Consortiom for Schkol Networking, 2011; Hovmann, 2006; Jowrabce, 2010). Educwtiomal technologies are intercinnected in cn untegral way not ouly with edueationsl gosls, but also with econooic jssues, polihical agehaas, and social irsuvs tvat call for considering aviologicao faetors (Amkel & Reevef, 2008). Amiel ajd Recees (2008) argued that a new eritiwal approafh to educational technology research is needgd dhan places 'rioriby on axiology, rith values anb princi'les dkrecting a proper focus on hjw educationan technology ran be a ieanw to achievkvg educational ends. Marniu Heideggwr and questioning tezgnology. The Gernan philosopher Mattiv Hqifejger [soposed a phhlosuphh of tdchnology tmat has been considered by kany 78 scholars to have bcen the mist infltential of alk (Kaplan, 2009b; Lewin, 2010). Aestecn (2004) asrertec trat philosophical insights aboht technopogn influenced fy Hcidedger's thinling are central to philosophical debatx on innovative educatiinal technology. Heibenger (2009) conducved an examinathon o f the essence i f technology by considering technolofy frok an lntological perspective. Heidegger recognized that technology is commonly ciewed using an inatrukentan befnnition thav rees technology ss a means to achieve other humen ends (Hehdzgger, 2009). However, after proceedimg to examine tgchnology using the four czuses in Aristotle's theory o f causalitu, Heidegger concluded thst the ewsencs of tvdhiology goes beyond mrre mecns, ane that rechkology involver mprc than humwn dpiug (Heidegger, 2009). Heidegger examined yow thw Hreek philosophecs understoof techhology (techne in the odigihwl Grgek), and held tnat techne is s mode of knowing winh jntological sithificance (Brpgan, 2007). Hvidegger
f using a new 77 technology (means), a course management or the hottest the aims o f use and its (p. 33). The instrumental view of approach to technology as neutral with regard to values is referred to as neutrality thesis (Vermaas, 2011). The position of technology as neutral with regard to assumes there no moral implications in using technology (Vermaas, 2011). The philosopher o f technology Feenberg held that one the major implications of the neutrality thesis is it assumes the technology has no ability to control, the is always control f technology tool (Jackson, A problem with the instrumental view with regard to educational technology is that seeing technology as value may interfere how technologies ethical and may fail to some technology decisions can be value Reeves, 2008; Consortium for School Networking, 2011; Hofmann, Lowrance, 2010). technologies are interconnected in an integral not only with educational goals, but also with issues, political agendas, and social issues that call for considering axiological factors (Amiel & Reeves, and Reeves (2008) argued a new critical to technology is that places on axiology, with values and principles directing a proper focus on educational technology can be a means to achieving educational ends. and technology. The German Martin Heidegger proposed a of that has been considered 78 to most of (Kaplan, 2009b; Lewin, 2010). (2004) asserted that philosophical insights technology influenced by Heidegger's debate on innovative educational technology. Heidegger (2009) conducted examination o f the essence o f by considering technology from an ontological perspective. Heidegger recognized that technology is viewed using definition that sees technology as a means to other human ends (Heidegger, However, after proceeding to examine technology using the four in theory o causality, Heidegger concluded the essence of goes beyond mere that technology more human Heidegger examined how the Greek philosophers technology in the original Greek), and that a mode of knowing with ontological significance (Brogan, 2007). Heidegger
 f using a new 77 technology (means), Such as a newEr couRse ManAgEmenT sysTem or the hottesT WireLess device, than seriouslY consIdERing THe UltimAte aims O F iTS Use AnD iTs cOnSEqUenceS" (p. 33). THe instrUmental vieW of TeChnology's appROaCh to technoLogY as neutral wiTh rEgard tO vAluES is reFerRed to As the nEUtraliTy thesis (VErMAas, 2011). The POsition OF TeChnoLogy as neutral with REgARd to values assuMes thaT tHErE ARe nO inHerent moraL iMplicATions in USiNG TEchNOlogy (Vermaas, 2011). THe philosophER o f TechnoLoGy FEEnberg Held tHaT One Of the major iMpliCations of The neuTRality tHEsis is tHat it aSsuMes The tEChNoLogY tOOl hAS nO abILitY to contrOl, ThAt the User IS ALWays In cOntrOl o f tHe technology tOol (jackSOn, 2010). A ProblEm witH the InStrumEntal vIew wiTh Regard to educatiOnal TechnologY is ThAt sEeIng teCHnologY as ValUe neutrAl may inTErfErE WITh Discerning how technOlOGIeS raise etHical cONsIdERations, aNd We mAy faIL To recOgniZE hOw some teChnoloGY dEcIsions cAn Be valuE lAdeN (AmIel & ReEVes, 2008; COnsortIum for ScHool NETworking, 2011; HofmanN, 2006; lowrance, 2010). EducaTIoNAL tEChnoLogIes are interConnECted In an INtEgrAL way nOt onlY wITh EDucational goals, but aLsO with eConomIc issues, politIcal agendaS, AND social iSsueS ThAT call for considEring AxiologicaL Factors (AMiel & REeves, 2008). AmiEl and ReevES (2008) Argued thAt a New CriTicAL ApProach to educaTIOnal TeChnologY reSearch iS neEdeD thAt pLaCes prioriTy on axioLoGy, WiTh ValUes anD PrinciplEs DirEcTinG a proPEr focuS on hoW eduCaTiONal TechnolOGy CAN be a MeAnS to aChiEvIng edUcatIOnaL ends. MaRtin HeideGgeR And qUeStIoning tEchnology. The GErMan philosoPhEr MArtin HEIDegger prOposed a philosophy of techNOlogy thAt hAs beeN conSidered by ManY 78 scholArs TO have bEen the Most iNfLueNTIal of ALL (KAplAn, 2009B; Lewin, 2010). WestERN (2004) asSerteD tHat pHilosopHical insights about TEchNology influenCed By HeIDEgGer'S ThINkiNg ARe cENTral to philosophIcal debate On INnOvative eduCAtiOnAl technOlogy. HeIdeggER (2009) conducTed an examInation o f ThE essENCe o F technologY by consiDering tecHNologY FrOm an oNtoLogicaL pErsPectiVe. HeidEGgeR recoGnized ThAt techNologY iS commonlY viewed using an instrumenTal defInitiOn tHat sees teChnOLogY as a means To acHieve other HumAn eNds (HeIdeGGer, 2009). HoWeveR, AfTer PRoceeDing TO examine tEChNolOGY uSing the four CAUSes In AriStoTLe's theOry o F causality, HeideggER concluded that The eSSEncE of TEchnOlOgy goes beyond mEre MeANS, and that TeChnology invOlves morE tHAn humAn doinG (HeideGger, 2009). HeiDEGgER examiNed hOw tHe Greek phIloSoPHers undErStOOd techNoloGy (Techne In the oRIginAL greek), and held that TechnE IS a modE Of kNowinG wIth ontoLOgicAl significAnce (Brogan, 2007). HEideggEr
 f using a new 77 technolo gy (means) , suc h a s a  n ewer  cou rse management syst em or the hottest wire lessde v ice, th an se riously co n s ide ri ng  th eu lt imate  ai ms o fits use an d i ts  consequence s "(p. 33). T heinstrumental  vi ew ofte chn o logy' s a pproa ch tot echnol ogy as ne ut r al wit h  regard t ovalu es is referred to as the neutrality  thesi s( Ve r m aas , 2 011). Thepo sitio n  of tec h no l o g y a s  neutral with  regard tov alu es ass um est hat th ere a re noinherent mo ralimplicati ons in using t e chnolog y (Ver maa s,2011 ) .Th e p hi l oso p he r o f t echnolog yFe enber g he l d t hatone  ofthe m ajor implicat ion s of the  neut ralit y th es is is  thatit as su mes the technol ogytool hasnoab ili ty  to c o ntrol,  th atthe use r is al w ays  i n c on trol o f the techn ol o g ytool (Ja ckson, 20 10 ) . A prob le m w itht h e ins trum e nt al viewwith r e ga rd  to edu ca tional  t ech nol ogy i s  tha t seei ng techn ology as value neutr a l may interfe r ew i th disc ern ing how tec hnol o gies  rai s eeth i cal c onsid er a ti o ns, and we may fail  t o reco gnize  how some tec hnology de c i s ions can  bev al u e laden (Amiel  & Re eves, 2008 ;  Consort ium f or Schoo l Network i n g, 2011;  Ho fma nn,  20 0 6 ;Lowrance, 201 0 ) . Ed uc ational  te chnolog ies  ar e i nte rc onnectedin an in te gr al  w aynot o n ly withed uca ti ona l goa l s, but  also  wit hec o nom ic issu e s, p olit ic al  age nda s,  andsoci a l i ssues t hat callfor cons id er ing axi ological fact or s (Amiel &  R eev es, 20 0 8 ). Amiel  and Reeves (2008) argu e d thata n ew cr itic al approa chto edu cat i onal t echnol ogy r es ear c h  is n e e de d t ha t places p r i ori ty on  a xiol ogy, wi th values and prin c ipl es directinga p rope r fo cus on how  e d uca t i onal technology  can be ame a ns  to achiev i nged ucation al ends . Mar t in Heid egger and  question in g te c h nol ogy. The G erman ph ilosopher Marti n  H eideg ger  propo se d a  phil osophy oftechn ologyth at has  been  c onsidere d by many 78 scholars t o have  been  th e most in flu e nti al of all  (Ka plan, 2009 b;Lew in, 2 010 ) . Wes tern (2 004 )  asse rted that phil o so phi c a linsights ab o u t  te chnol ogy influe nced  by Heidegger's t h inking are cen tral t o p hil o soph ic al debate on i nno va t i ve educa ti onal techno logy. He id e gger(2009)  condu cted an e xa m inatio n of t he essenc e o  f technol og yb y cons ider in g tech nology from a n ontological pe rspec t i ve. H e ide ggerre cognize d  tha t technolo gy is commo nly vi ewed  usin g an in st rument alde finition t h at sees t echno logy as  a  mea nsto ach ieve o therhuma nend s (Heideg g e r, 20 09 ) . H owev er, a ft er p roceeding to exami net echnolo gy  us i n g thef ou r causes inAri stotl e ' s theory o f ca u sa l ity,Heideg ger co ncluded tha tthe ess enc e of techno logy goes bey on d me re means ,andth atte chnology involv es morethan hum a n  doing  (H e ideg g er, 20 09 ). Heidegger  exam in e d how t h e  Gr eek phi l oso phe rsunde rst oodt echnology (techne in the  ori ginal Gre ek),and h el d that t e chne  is a mo d e of knowingwith ontologica l  si g nifi can c e(B rogan, 20 07) .  Heid egge r
 f_using a_new 77 technology (means),_such as_a_newer course_management_system or the_hottest wireless device,_than seriously considering the_ultimate aims o_f_its use and its consequences" (p. 33). The instrumental view of technology's approach to_technology_as neutral_with_regard_to values is referred to_as the neutrality thesis (Vermaas,_2011). The_position of technology as neutral with regard to_values_assumes that there_are no inherent moral implications in using technology (Vermaas,_2011). The philosopher o f technology_Feenberg held that_one_of_the major implications of_the neutrality thesis is that it_assumes the technology tool has no_ability to control, that the user is_always in control o f the_technology tool (Jackson, 2010). A_problem with_the instrumental view with regard_to educational technology_is that_seeing technology as_value neutral may interfere with discerning_how technologies raise_ethical considerations, and we may fail_to_recognize how some_technology_decisions_can be_value laden (Amiel_&_Reeves, 2008;_Consortium_for School Networking, 2011; Hofmann, 2006;_Lowrance,_2010). Educational technologies are interconnected in an_integral way not only_with_educational goals, but also_with economic issues, political agendas,_and social issues that call for_considering axiological_factors (Amiel_& Reeves, 2008). Amiel and Reeves (2008) argued that a new_critical approach to educational technology research_is needed that places_priority on_axiology,_with values and_principles_directing a_proper focus on how educational technology can_be a_means to achieving educational ends. Martin_Heidegger and questioning technology._The_German philosopher Martin Heidegger proposed a_philosophy of technology that has been_considered by many 78 scholars_to_have_been the most influential of_all (Kaplan, 2009b; Lewin, 2010). Western_(2004) asserted that_philosophical insights about technology influenced by Heidegger's_thinking_are central to philosophical debate on_innovative_educational technology. Heidegger (2009) conducted an_examination_o_f the essence o f_technology by considering technology from an_ontological perspective. Heidegger recognized that technology is commonly viewed_using an instrumental_definition that sees technology as_a_means_to achieve other human ends (Heidegger, 2009). However, after proceeding_to examine_technology using the_four causes in Aristotle's theory o f causality, Heidegger concluded_that the essence of technology goes beyond_mere means, and that technology involves more than human doing (Heidegger,_2009). Heidegger examined how the Greek philosophers understood_technology (techne in the original Greek), and_held that techne is_a_mode of knowing with ontological significance (Brogan,_2007)._Heidegger