 While this study did involve examining assumptions of technological optimism or pessimism, it was not a major area of inquiry, so questions were limited. Because the category Technological optimism emerged as a prevalent category, the researcher recommends that future studies be conducted to investigate this further. Conclusions Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) argued that educators should critically question their philosophical assumptions and ideological perspectives about technology, because beliefs and ways of thinking about technology influence professional discourse, and affect the actions of decision makers. The results and conclusions from this qualitative study lend support for the importance of examining philosophy of technology assumptions in education. The study showed that philosophy o f technology assumptions matter, the assumptions shape educational technology leaders' approaches to technology 274 decision making, and these philosophical approaches to decision making have consequences. The study found that three broad philosophy o f technology views were widely held by participants, including an instrumental view o f technology, technological optimism, and a technological determinist perspective that sees technological change as inevitable. The category Technology is a tool represented the instrumental view of technology. The researcher concludes this overarching philosophical viewpoint of the participants is in alignment with what scholars and philosophers have argued is a popular and widely held philosophy of technology (Franssen et al., 2009; Jackson, 2010). A surprising finding of the study was that while the instrumental view of technology was prevalent, a philosophical position normally associated with the instrumental view, the neutrality thesis, was only associated with eight participants. This contrasted with the category Technology raises questions o f human values that was associated with 22 participants. Despite the prevalence of the instrumental view of technology as a whole, we can conclude that the philosophy of technology views of most participants did not align with the neutrality thesis, but with Hofmann's theory that technology is value laden, raises questions o f values, and has ethical consequences (Hofmann, 2006). The researcher proposes that the surprising result may be explained as a possible case of cognitive dissonance between technology is value neutral, and Technology raises questions o f human values, with greater weight given to the latter (see Figure 3). When a person considers two views that are inconsistent with each other, cognitive dissonance posits that the person weighs the importance of the cognitions, and 275 may add or subtract from the alternatives to reduce the inconsistency (Harmon-Jones, 2009). The category Consider ethical factors associated with technology was prevalent, and the researcher concluded that this category is an approach to technology decision making arising out of a philosophical viewpoint similar to Hofrnann's theory that
While this study did involve examining assumptions of technical optimism or pessimism, it was not a major sphere of question, so questions were limited. Because the category Technological optimism issue as a prevalent category, the research worker recommends that future studies be conducted to investigate this farther. Conclusions Strobel and Tillberg - Webb (2009) argued that educators should critically wonder their philosophical assumptions and ideological position about technology, because beliefs and ways of thinking about technology influence professional sermon, and affect the actions of decision manufacturer. The results and conclusions from this qualitative study lend documentation for the importance of examining philosophy of technology assumptions in education. The report showed that philosophy o f technology assumptions count, the premise shape educational technology leaders' approaches to technology 274 decision making, and these philosophical approaches to decisiveness devising have consequence. The study found that three broad philosophy oxygen f technology view were widely held by participant, including an instrumental view o f technology, technological optimism, and a technical determinist perspective that sees technological change as inevitable. The category Technology is a tool represent the instrumental view of technology. The researcher concludes this overarch philosophical viewpoint of the participants is in alliance with what scholars and philosophers have argued is a popular and wide held philosophy of technology (Franssen et al. , 2009; Jackson, 2010). A surprising finding of the study was that while the implemental view of technology was prevalent, a philosophical side normally associated with the implemental view, the neutrality thesis, was entirely associated with eight player. This contrasted with the category Technology raises questions o f human values that was associated with 22 participants. Despite the prevalence of the instrumental position of technology as a whole, we can conclude that the doctrine of technology views of most participants did not align with the neutrality thesis, but with Hofmann's theory that technology is value laden, raise questions o f values, and has ethical consequences (Hofmann, 2006). The researcher proposes that the surprising consequence may be excuse as a potential character of cognitive dissonance between technology is value neutral, and Technology raises questions o f human value, with greater weight given to the latter (experience Figure 3). When a person considers two views that are inconsistent with each other, cognitive dissonance postulate that the person weighs the importance of the cognitions, and 275 may add or subtract from the alternatives to reduce the inconsistency (Harmon - Jones, 2009). The category see ethical factors associated with technology was prevalent, and the researcher concluded that this class is an approach path to technology decision making arising out of a philosophical viewpoint similar to Hofrnann's theory that
 Whlle this study did involye examining assomptions of tedhnologizal optimism or pessimism, it wqs nou a major area of ivquiry, so questiobs wtre limited. Because the categorg Tecknilogical optimlsm emerged as a prevalend zacegory, the researcher recommends thae futurr dtudies be conqucttd eo ihnewtigate this further. Conclusikns Strmbel and Tillnerg-Webb (2009) argued that educwtord should criticallj question jgeiw philosophicxl assumptpmns and idgological perspectives about tecfnoloyy, because veoievv and ways if thpnking about bvchnolocy inflience professipnan duscourse, and affect tie actions of decisijn makers. Tke results and concluwiins ftom tvis dyalktauivx sfudy lfnd support fkr the impoetance of examining prpkosophy of tschnoljgr assumptions in education. The study shmwes that philosophy o f twchnology assumptions matter, tre assumptions shape educational technology leadess' ap'ruackcf ro technology 274 decision making, and these philosjlhocsl approaches bo decision making hwvr consequences. The schdg found that three broad khilosiphy o f uechnplogy views were widely hele by particiiantw, including an inscrumental vizw o f techmology, technological opcimism, and a techjological aeterminist persoecnive that setr technological crange as mnevicable. Thd cajegory Eechnology is a tool represented tje indtsumental vlew of technology. The researchec concludes tniv onerarchiny philpsophical vierpoint of the karticipauts is in alignmvnt with xhat scholarf and philoso[jers have arjued is a popylar and wiadly held philoxophy of neehnology (Dranssen et al., 2009; Jagkson, 2010). A surprising fnudung of the studu wxs ehwt wrhle the instsumevtau view of technoliey wss prevalent, a philovophjcal position normsljy assocuated wieh the instrukental view, the nektralmty thxsis, wss jnly associated with eight parficipants. Thls contrasted witm thg category Cechnology raises questions o f human vaoues that was assoxiated with 22 particnpsnts. Despitx the [revalenca of the instrumentao view of technolpgy as a whole, we can conclgde tjat the philosophy of technology views of most participants did not align with vhq neutralitg thrsis, tuc wnth Hofiann'd theory that tecnnology is value laden, raises qnestions o f values, and has ethical consrqjences (Hofmanv, 2006). The researcher proposss that yhe surprising result may be exllained as a possible caxe of cotnitibe dissonaice between technoloby is ralue beutral, and Technology rxisrs questiond o h hbman values, with greater weight guven ti hhe latter (see Fmgure 3). When w perskn confiders two views thaf are knconsistent eith each othet, cognitive dissonanbe [osits that tht person weighs the imiortance of tie cognitionv, and 275 may add or subtract from the alternatives to reduce tge inconsmstency (Harmon-Klnes, 2009). The category Conxiqer ethizal factors dssociated with technology was prevalent, anv the fesvarched concluded tvat this category lw an approxch ti technologt decision jaking srysing out of a philosophpcal biawpoint wmmklar to Mofrnann's thgory that
While this study did involve examining assumptions optimism pessimism, it not a major were Because the category optimism emerged as prevalent category, the researcher recommends that studies be conducted to investigate this further. Conclusions Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) argued educators should critically question their philosophical assumptions and ideological perspectives about technology, because and of about influence professional discourse, and affect the actions of decision makers. The results and conclusions from this study lend support for the importance of examining of technology assumptions in The study showed that philosophy f assumptions matter, assumptions educational leaders' approaches to 274 decision making, and these philosophical approaches to decision making have consequences. The study found that three philosophy o views were held participants, an instrumental view technology, technological optimism, and a technological sees technological change as inevitable. The category Technology a tool the instrumental view of technology. The concludes this overarching philosophical viewpoint of the participants in alignment with what scholars and philosophers have argued is a popular and widely held technology (Franssen et al., Jackson, 2010). A finding the was while the view of technology was prevalent, a philosophical position normally associated with instrumental view, the neutrality thesis, was only associated with eight contrasted the category Technology questions o f human that associated with 22 participants. prevalence the technology a we can conclude that philosophy of technology views of participants did not align with Hofmann's theory that technology is value laden, questions o f values, and has ethical (Hofmann, 2006). The researcher proposes that the surprising result may be explained a possible cognitive dissonance between technology is value neutral, and raises questions o f values, with greater weight given to the latter (see 3). a person two views that inconsistent with each cognitive dissonance posits person weighs importance the may add or subtract from the to the inconsistency (Harmon-Jones, 2009). The Consider associated with technology was prevalent, and the researcher concluded that this category is an approach decision making arising out a viewpoint similar to Hofrnann's theory that
 While this study did involve eXamining asSumptIonS of TeChnoLogiCal optimism or pESsimIsm, it was not a major area oF inquIrY, So quEStIons wEre limiTEd. bECauSe ThE caTeGOrY TechNolOgical oPtimism emeRgeD aS a prevalent cATeGory, the resEarCher recommenDs tHat futUrE stUDies bE coNductEd to inVEstigaTe this furThER. ConclUSions StROBeL and tillberg-Webb (2009) argueD ThAT educators shouLd critIcALlY QUesTioN their philOsOphicAL assumpTIoNS ANd iDEological persPectives aboUT teChnoloGy, BecAUse belIefs aNd WAys Of thinking aBout TechnologY influENce profESsional DiscouRse, And AffeCT tHe ActIoNS of DEcIsiON maKers. The rEsUlTs and ConcLUSIOns fRom This QualiTative study leNd sUppoRT foR the iMportAnce Of ExamiNing phIlosoPhY of technology asSumpTions in edUcaTiOn. THe Study SHowed tHat PhiLosophy O f technOLogY aSSUMpTions matter, the assuMpTIOnS shape edUcatioNAl TeCHnology lEaDerS' appROAches To teCHnOlogy 274 decIsion mAKiNg, And thesE pHilosoPhIcaL apProacHEs to DecisiOn making Have cONsequences. The sTUdy found that tHReE BRoAD phiLosOphy o f technOlogY ViewS werE WiDelY Held bY partIcIPaNTs, including an instruMeNtal viEw o f tEchnology, techNological oPTIMism, and a TechNOlOGical determiniSt perSpective thAT sees tecHnoloGical chaNge as inevITAble. The cAteGorY TeChnOLOgY is a tool repreSENted ThE instruMenTal view Of tEchNolOgy. thE researchEr concluDeS tHiS oVerArchiNG philosoPhIcaL vIewPoint OF the paRticiPantS iS iN AliGnment wITh WHAt scHoLaRs anD phIlOsophErs hAVe aRgued is A popular aNd wIDely HeLd PhilosoPhy of technoloGy (franssen et Al., 2009; jacKson, 2010). A sURPrising fInding of the study was that WHile the InsTrumeNtal View of tecHnoLogy waS prEValent, A philoSophiCaL poSITion nORMaLly AsSociated wiTH The InstrUmEntaL view, thE neutrality thesis, wAS onLy associated wIth EighT PArTicIPaNTs. THiS ConTRAsted with the catEgory TechnOlOGy Raises quesTIonS o F human vAlues thAt was ASsociatEd with 22 parTicipants. deSpitE THe pRevalence oF the instRumental vIEw of tEChNologY as A whole, We Can ConclUde thaT The PhiloSophy oF tEchnolOgy viEwS of most pArticipants did not align wIth the NeutrAliTy thesis, bUt wITh HOfmann's thEory That technoLogY is Value LadEN, raisEs quEStIonS O f valUes, aND has ethicAL cOnsEQUeNces (Hofmann, 2006). tHE ResEarchEr pROposes That The surprising resuLT may be explaineD as a POSsiBle CAse oF cOgnitive dissonAncE bETWeen techNoLogy is value Neutral, aNd tEchnoLogy raIses quEstions O F HuMAn valuEs, wiTh gReater weiGht GiVEn to the LaTtER (see FiGure 3). whEn a perSon conSIderS TWo views that are inConsiSTEnt wiTH eaCh othEr, CognitiVE disSonance posIts that the pErson wEighS the iMportanCe Of the cOgnItIons, and 275 may ADd or subtrAct frOm the alTeRnatIveS to redUce tHE InconSistEnCy (HArmon-JoneS, 2009). tHe CAtEgORy COnsiDer etHiCal fActors assOCiated wiTh tEChnologY wAs pREValent, ANd THE researcheR coNcludED That this caTEgorY Is AN apprOach to TechnoLogy decISioN mAking arIsiNG Out of a phiLosophicaL VieWpOint Similar tO HOfrnAnN's tHeOry that
 While this study did invo lve examin ing a ssu mpt io ns o f te chnological op t imis m or pessimism, it was  notam ajor ar ea of  inquir y ,s o  qu es ti ons  w e re  limi ted . Becau se the cat ego ry  Technologic a loptimism e mer ged as a pre val ent ca te gor y , the  re searc her re c ommend s that fu tu r e stud i es be c o n du cted  to investigate t h is further. Concl usions  S t ro b e l a ndTillberg-W eb b (20 0 9) argu e dt h a t e d ucators shoul d criticall y  qu estion  t hei r  philo sophi ca l  as sumptions a nd i deologica l pers p ectives about t echnol ogy , b ecau s ebe lie fs and wa yso f t hinkingab ou t tec hnol o g y infl uen ce p rofes sional discou rse , an d  af fectthe a ctio ns  of d ecisio n mak er s. The resultsandconclusio nsfr omth is qu a litati vestu dy lend  suppor t  fo rt h e  i mportance of exami ni n g  p hilosoph y of t e ch no l ogy assu mp tio ns i n educa tion .  T he study  showe d  t ha t philo so phy oftec hno logya ssum ptions  matter,  thea ssumptions sha p e educational te c h no l ogylea ders' appro ache s  totech n ol ogy 274 d ecisi on ma k ing, and these phil os ophica l app roaches to de cision mak i n g  have co nseq u en c es. The studyfound  that thre e  broad p hilos ophy o f  technolo g y  views w ere  wi del y h e l dby participan t s , in cl uding a n i nstrume nta l v iew  oftechnolog y, techn ol og ic al  op timis m , and ate chn ol ogi cal d e termin ist p ersp ec ti v e t hat see s  t e c hnol og ic al c han ge  as i nevi t abl e. ThecategoryTec h nolo gy  i s a too l represented  t he instrum en tal  viewo f  technol ogy. The researcher con c ludes t his  over arch ing philo sop hicalvie w pointof the  part ic ipa n t s isi n  a lig nm ent with w h a t s chola rs  and  philos ophers have argued isa popular and  wi dely h el d p h il o sop hy oft e chnology (Frans sen et al. ,2 00 9; Jackson ,  20 10 ). A su rprisin g fin d ing ofthe study  was that  w hile t heinstrument al viewof techno l ogy w a spreva len t, a p hi los ophic al pos i tio n nor mallyas sociat ed wi th  the ins trumental view, the neu tralit y the sis , was onl y a s soc iated wit h ei ght partic ipa nts . Thi s c o ntras tedw it h t h e cat egor y  Technolo g yrai s e squestions o f hum an va lue s  thatwasassociated with 2 2  participants.  Des p i tethe prev al ence of the in str um e n tal view  o f technolog y as a w ho l e, we  can c onclud e thatt h ep hiloso phyoftechnolog y v ie w s of mo st  p a rticip ants  d id not  align with t he neutrality th esis, b ut wi t h H ofman n' s theor y  tha t technolo gy is value  laden , ra isesquestio ns  o f v alu es , and hase thical co nsequ ences ( Ho fman n,2006).  The r esear cher  p rop oses that t he su rp r isi ng r esult  m ay b e explain e d as a p oss i ble cas eofc o gnitiv e  d i s sonance be twe en te c h nology isv alue ne u tral,  and T echnol ogy rai s esqu estions  of human val ues, with gre at er w eight gi ve n to  t hela tter (see Figur e 3). Wh en a per s o n cons ide r s tw o  views  t hat are inco nsist en t  with e a c h o ther, c o gni tiv e d isso nan ce p o sits that the person wei ghsthe i m por tance  of t he  cogniti o ns,and 275m ay add or sub tract from thea lte r nati ves to  r educe the  in c onsis tenc y ( Harm on- Jone s ,  200 9 ). T h ecate gory C onsi de rethical f ac tors as s ocia t edwith  tech no lo g ywas pre valent,and t he  research e r concl uded  t hat this cate gory is an a pp roac h to t e chn olo g y  decision ma king arisi ngout of a p hi los o phi cal v iewpoint simi lar  t o  Ho frna nn 's the ory that 
 While_this study_did involve examining assumptions_of technological_optimism_or pessimism,_it_was not a_major area of_inquiry, so questions were_limited. Because the_category_Technological optimism emerged as a prevalent category, the researcher recommends that future studies be_conducted_to investigate_this_further._Conclusions Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009)_argued that educators should critically_question their_philosophical assumptions and ideological perspectives about technology, because_beliefs_and ways of_thinking about technology influence professional discourse, and affect the_actions of decision makers. The results_and conclusions from_this_qualitative_study lend support for_the importance of examining philosophy of_technology assumptions in education. The study_showed that philosophy o f technology assumptions_matter, the assumptions shape educational technology_leaders' approaches to technology 274_decision making,_and these philosophical approaches to_decision making have_consequences. The_study found that_three broad philosophy o f technology_views were widely_held by participants, including an instrumental_view_o f technology,_technological_optimism,_and a_technological determinist perspective_that_sees technological_change_as inevitable. The category Technology is_a_tool represented the instrumental view of technology._The researcher concludes this_overarching_philosophical viewpoint of the_participants is in alignment with_what scholars and philosophers have argued_is a_popular and_widely held philosophy of technology (Franssen et al., 2009; Jackson, 2010)._A surprising finding of the study_was that while the_instrumental view_of_technology was prevalent,_a_philosophical position_normally associated with the instrumental view, the_neutrality thesis,_was only associated with eight participants._This contrasted with the_category_Technology raises questions o f human_values that was associated with 22_participants. Despite the prevalence of_the_instrumental_view of technology as a_whole, we can conclude that the_philosophy of technology_views of most participants did not align_with_the neutrality thesis, but with Hofmann's_theory_that technology is value laden, raises_questions_o_f values, and has ethical_consequences (Hofmann, 2006). The researcher proposes_that the surprising result may be explained as a_possible case of_cognitive dissonance between technology is_value_neutral,_and Technology raises questions o f human values, with greater_weight given_to the latter_(see Figure 3). When a person considers two views that_are inconsistent with each other, cognitive dissonance_posits that the person weighs the importance of the cognitions, and_275 may add or subtract from the alternatives_to reduce the inconsistency (Harmon-Jones, 2009). The_category Consider ethical factors_associated_with technology was prevalent, and the researcher_concluded_that_this_category is an_approach to technology_decision making arising_out of_a philosophical viewpoint_similar to_Hofrnann's theory that