 invite reflection, and inspire debate on pertinent ethical considerations that involve instructional technology. The researchers argued that by examining the ethical dimension of instructional technology, and discussing ethical values surrounding technology, researchers and educators can better promote a disciplined and ethically informed conversation about technology enhanced learning (Lally et al., 2010). In arguing for why educators should examine philosophical assumptions about technology, Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) asserted "before approaching technology integration in instruction, it is imperative to examine one's own assumptions and beliefs about technologies and their impact on human users" (p. 77). Deeper dialogue between 73 educators about technology can better recognize cultural and moral dimensions, and consider the positive benefits of technology while identifying potential problems (Kritt & Winegar, 2010). Philosophical assumptions that technology drives society and education can be dehumanizing, and despite technological utopian rhetoric that sees technology as leveling social inequalities, a digital divide for students with disparity of access to technology continues to persist (Fuchs, 2009; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Technological development may enhance the advantage of some regardless of the expense to others (Sabatino, 2007), and development driven by competition and market forces may not serve the common good (Kritt & Winegar, 2010). Selwyn (2010b) argued that a critical approach to educational technology research would be more cognizant of social justice issues concerning equitable access to digital technology. Assumptions characterized by technological determinism can find educators facing pressure to keep up with technology or fall behind, and educators may feel like they have little sense of agency in a world run by technology (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Kritt and Winegar (2010) considered the question whether technology will be transformed by its human users, or whether people will be more transformed by technology. Kritt and Winegar (2010) argued for the importance of human agency directing future evolution of educational technology. The critique of technological determinism that follows later in the literature review will examine and critique this theory of technology in depth, including different variations o f the technological determinist perspective. 74 Foundations in Philosophy of Technology Franssen et al. (2009) asserted that technology is a major cultural and economic force that operates as a framework to hold contemporary society together. Philosophy of technology examines the underlying assumptions of how technologies impact and transform human society in ways that are philosophically relevant (Kaplan, 2009a). While earlier philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and
invite reflection, and inspire debate on apposite ethical consideration that involve instructional technology. The research worker argued that by examine the ethical dimension of instructional engineering, and discussing ethical values surrounding engineering, research worker and educators can better advertise a disciplined and ethically informed conversation about engineering enhanced learning (Lally et al. , 2010). In arguing for why educators should examine philosophical assumptions about engineering, Strobel and Tillberg - Webb (2009) asserted " before approaching technology consolidation in instruction, it is imperative to examine one's own assumptions and beliefs about technologies and their impingement on human users " (p. 77). Deeper dialogue between 73 educators about technology can well recognize cultural and moral dimensions, and consider the positive benefits of engineering while identify potential problems (Kritt & Winegar, 2010). Philosophical assumptions that technology drives society and education can be dehumanizing, and despite technological utopian grandiosity that sees technology as flush social inequality, a digital divide for students with disparity of access to technology continues to persist (Fuchs, 2009; Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). Technological development may enhance the advantage of some regardless of the expense to others (Sabatino, 2007), and growth driven by competition and market forces may not serve the common commodity (Kritt & Winegar, 2010). Selwyn (2010b) argued that a critical approach to educational technology research would be more cognizant of social justice issues refer equitable access to digital technology. Assumptions characterized by technological determinism can rule educators facing pressure to observe up with engineering or fall behind, and educators may feel like they have little common sense of agency in a world run by technology (Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). Kritt and Winegar (2010) considered the doubt whether technology will be transform by its human users, or whether multitude will be more transformed by technology. Kritt and Winegar (2010) argued for the importance of human agency directing future development of educational technology. The critique of technological determinism that be later in the literature review will examine and review this theory of technology in depth, including unlike variations o f the technological determinist perspective. 74 Foundations in Philosophy of Technology Franssen et al. (2009) asserted that technology is a major cultural and economic power that operates as a framework to hold contemporary society together. Philosophy of engineering examines the underlying assumptions of how technologies impact and transform human society in ways that are philosophically relevant (Kaplan, 2009a). While early philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and
 ingite reflection, and insplre debate on pettunent xthical considefations that involve instrucvionql texhnology. The researchefs argued that by exanuning the xfhical dimensjln oy mnstructional tgchnology, ang discussing edhkccl values surrounding technology, resqarcherx wnd educators san nqtted promote a disciplined and ethicamly infmrmed conversstion about technology enhwncef learning (Lally eh al., 2010). In artuind for why eduzators sholnd examine philosophical assumptions aboug tecknology, Stribwl wtd Tillberg-Xebb (2009) wsserted "before apprmaching technology inbegravion in instruction, it is imperative to exaiine one's ocn assumptions and beoiwfs atout tecfbolugits end their im'act on humzn users" (p. 77). Deeper dialogue beuweqb 73 educators zbout eeshnology can better recognize cultural dnd moral dimensions, and cinsider the positive henefits jf technology while identifying potential problemv (Krivt & Wnkcgar, 2010). Pjilosophical assumptions that technology drivqa xobiety and educatijn can be drhkmsgizing, and derpite cscgnological utopian rhetoryc thqt sees ttchnokogy as leveling social inewualities, a bigutal divide for stbdents with bisparoty og access to technology eontinhes to perslst (Fuchs, 2009; Strobel & Tillbefg-Wvbb, 2009). Technological development may enhaice tke advangage of soie regardlfss on the expense to otjers (Datatino, 2007), anf development driven by competivmon and markej fmrcvs may noc servc the common gojd (Kritt & Wineyar, 2010). Selcyn (2010b) xrgued than a critiral approach to educationdp technology researcr woyld ve more zognizant of spcial jusniee issues concerning equitanle azdess to digital texhnology. Assumpyiovs shwrecterysed by technmlogkcau detefminism can wind educators facing prassude to keep up with tcchnology or fall behind, and ecucators may feel pike vhey heve liytlg sense of agency in a world ruh by techjoljgy (Strobel & Tiloberg-Webb, 2009). Kxitt and Winegar (2010) considered the questioi whether technology wiol be transformed bi ius human userx, or rhether paople will be more teansformed by tecmnology. Kritt and Winefar (2010) asgued for the importance of human agency directing future evolution of educatiinal txcrnology. The criyique oy tzchnolodicap determinism than follows later in the literaturx review whlj examine and critique this yhdory of technulogy in depth, including differemt variations o f the technologocal determinist perspecbive. 74 Foubdatikns in Phiuosophy of Technolpgy Frcnssen et al. (2009) asscrted that tecfnokony is a mauor rulcural and economic force that opeeates qs a framework to iold contemplvary skciety together. Philoskphy lf tezhnology examones the underkying assumptions of hjw technologiew impact and jransfork human socixty in ways dhat are philosophically relevant (Kaplan, 2009a). While eatlier philoaophers snch as Plato, Atidtotle, and
invite reflection, and inspire debate on pertinent that instructional technology. researchers argued that of technology, and discussing values surrounding technology, and educators can better promote a and ethically informed conversation about technology enhanced learning (Lally et al., 2010). In for why educators should examine philosophical assumptions about technology, Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) "before technology in it is imperative to examine one's own assumptions and beliefs about technologies and their impact on users" (p. 77). Deeper dialogue between 73 educators technology can better recognize and moral dimensions, and consider positive of technology identifying problems & Winegar, 2010). assumptions that technology drives society and education can be dehumanizing, and despite technological utopian rhetoric that sees as leveling a digital for with of access to to persist (Fuchs, 2009; Strobel & development may enhance the advantage of some regardless the expense others (Sabatino, 2007), and development driven competition and market forces may not serve the good (Kritt & Winegar, 2010). Selwyn (2010b) argued that a critical approach to educational technology be more cognizant of justice issues concerning access digital Assumptions by technological can find educators facing pressure to keep up with technology or behind, and educators may feel like they have little sense in world run by (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). and (2010) considered the question will transformed users, whether will be more transformed technology. Kritt and Winegar (2010) for the importance of of educational technology. The critique of technological determinism follows later in the literature review will and critique this theory of technology in depth, including different variations o the technological 74 Foundations in Philosophy of Technology Franssen et (2009) asserted that technology a major cultural and economic force that operates as framework hold contemporary together. Philosophy of examines the underlying of how technologies transform human in that (Kaplan, 2009a). While earlier philosophers such Plato, and
 invite reflection, and inspirE debate on pErtinEnt EthIcAl coNsidErations that inVOlve Instructional technologY. The rEsEArchERs ArgueD that by EXaMINinG tHe EthIcAL dImensIon Of instrUctional teChnOlOgy, and discusSInG ethical vaLueS surrounding TecHnologY, rEseARcherS anD educAtors cAN betteR promote a DiSCiplinED and ethICAlLy inFormed conversatioN AbOUt technology enHanced LeARnING (LaLly Et al., 2010). In arguInG for wHY educatORs SHOUld EXamine philosoPhical assumPTioNs abouT tEchNOlogy, STrobeL aND TiLlberg-Webb (2009) aSserTed "before ApproaCHing tecHNology iNtegraTioN in InstRUcTiOn, iT iS ImpERaTivE To eXamine onE's OwN assuMptiONS ANd beLieFs abOut teChnologies and TheIr imPAct On humAn useRs" (p. 77). DEePer diAlogue BetweEn 73 Educators about tEchnOlogy can bEttEr RecOgNize cULtural And MorAl dimenSions, anD ConSiDER ThE positive benefits oF tECHnOlogy whiLe idenTIfYiNG potentiAl ProBlemS (kRitt & WInegAR, 2010). PHilosophIcal asSUmPtIons thaT tEchnolOgY drIveS sociETy anD educaTion can bE dehuMAnizing, and despITe technologicAL uTOPiAN rheTorIc that sees tEchnOLogy As leVElIng SOcial InequAlITiES, a digital divide for sTuDents wIth diSparity of acceSs to technoLOGY continuEs to PErSIst (Fuchs, 2009; StrobeL & TillBerg-Webb, 2009). TeCHnologicAl devElopment May enhancE THe advantAge Of sOme RegARDlEss of the expenSE To otHeRs (SabatIno, 2007), And deveLopMenT drIveN bY competitIon and maRkEt FoRcEs mAy not SErve the cOmMon GoOd (KRitt & WINegar, 2010). SElwyn (2010B) argUeD tHAt a CriticaL ApPROach To EdUcatIonAl TechnOlogY ResEarch woUld be more CogNIzanT oF sOcial juStice issues coNcErning equiTaBle Access TO Digital tEchnology. Assumptions chaRActerizEd bY techNoloGical deteRmiNism caN fiND educaTors faCing pReSsuRE To keeP UP wIth TeChnology or FALl bEhind, AnD eduCators mAy feel like they have LIttLe sense of agenCy iN a woRLD rUn bY TeCHnoLoGY (StROBel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). kritt and WiNeGAr (2010) Considered THe qUeStion whEther teChnolOGy will bE transforMed by its hUmAn usERS, or Whether peoPle will bE more tranSFormeD By TechnOloGy. KritT aNd WInegaR (2010) argueD For The imPortanCe Of humaN agenCy DirectinG future evolution of educaTional TechnOloGy. The critIquE Of tEchnologiCal dEterminism ThaT foLlows LatER in thE litERaTurE RevieW wilL Examine anD CrItiQUE tHis theory of TECHnoLogy iN dePTh, inclUdinG different variatiONs o f the technolOgicAL DetErmINist PeRspective. 74 FoundAtiOnS IN PhilosoPhY of TechnoloGy FranssEn ET al. (2009) asSerted That teChnologY IS a MAjor cuLturAl aNd economiC foRcE That opeRaTeS As a fraMewoRk To hold ContemPOrarY SOciety together. PhIlosoPHY of teCHnoLogy eXaMines thE UndeRlying assuMptions of hoW technOlogIes imPact and TrAnsforM huMaN society in WAys that arE philOsophicAlLy reLevAnt (KapLan, 2009a). wHIle eaRlieR pHilOsophers sUCH aS plAtO, ariStotLe, and
 invite reflection, and in spire deba te on  pe rti ne nt e thic al considerati o ns t hat involve instructio nal t ec h nolo g y.  Theresearc h er s arg ue dtha tb yexami nin g the e thical dim ens io n of instruc t io nal techno log y, and discu ssi ng eth ic alv alues  su rroun ding t e chnolo gy, resea rc h ers an d  educat o r scanbetter promote ad is c iplined and et hicall yi nf o r med  co nversation  a boutt echnolo g ye n h anc e d learning (L ally et al. ,  20 10). I narg u ing fo r why  e d uca tors should  exa mine phil osophi c al assu m ptionsabouttec hno logy ,  S tr obe la ndT il lbe r g-W ebb (200 9)  a ssert ed " b e f o re a ppr oach ing t echnology int egr atio n  in  inst ructi on,it  is i mperat ive t oexamine one's o wn a ssumption s a nd  be li efs a b out te chn olo gies an d their imp ac t o nhuman users" (p. 7 7) . De eper dia logueb et we e n 73 edu ca tor s ab o u t tec hnol o gy  can bet ter re c og ni ze cult ur al and  m ora l d imens i ons,  and c onsiderthe p o sitive benefit s  of technolog y  w h i le iden tif ying potent ialp robl ems( Kr itt & Win egar,  2 0 10 ) . Philosophical ass um ptions  that  technology d rives soci e t y  and edu cati o nc an be dehumani zing,  and despi t e techno logic al utopi an rhetor i c  that se estec hno log y as  leveling soc i a l in eq ualitie s,a digit aldiv ide  fo rstudentswith dis pa ri ty  o f a ccess to techn ol ogy  c ont inues to per sist(Fuc hs ,2 009 ; Strob e l& Till be rg -Web b,20 09).Tech n olo gical d evelopmen t m a y en ha nc e the a dvantage of s om e regardle ss  of  the e x p ense toothers (Sabatino, 2007) ,  and de vel opmen t dr iven by c omp etitio n a n d mark et for ces m ay  no t serve t he  co mm on good (K r i tt& Win eg ar,2010).Selwyn (2010b) arg u edthat a critic alappr o a ch  to ed u cat io n alt e chnology resear ch would b em or e cognizan t  of  s ocial j usticeissue s  concer ning equi table acc es s to d igi tal techno logy. As sumptions chara c te rized  by  techn ol ogi cal d etermi n ism  canfind e du cators  faci ng  pressur e to keep up with techn ologyor fa llbehind, a nde duc ators may  fee l like the y h ave  litt les enseof a g en cyi n a w orld run by te c hn olo g y  ( Strobel & T i l l ber g-Web b,2 009).Krit t and Winegar (20 1 0) consideredtheq u est ion whet he r technology w ill  b e transfor me d by its hu man user s, or wh etherpeople  will b e mo r e tran sfor med  by techn olo gy .  Krittan dW inegar  (20 10 ) argu ed for thei m portance of huma n age n c y dir e cti ng fu tu re evol u tion  of educat ional techn ology.  The  crit ique of  t echnol ogi ca l determin i sm that f ollow s later  i n th e l iterat urer e viewwill  e xam ine and c r i ti q ue  t h istheo ry of  t echn ology ind epth, in clu d ing dif fe ren t variat i on s o f the te chn ologi c a l determin i st p e rs p ectiv e. 74Founda tions i n  Ph il osophyofT e chnologyFranssene t a l.  (20 09) asse rt ed t ha t t ec hnology is a ma jor cult ural and e conomi c f o rcet hat op er ates as a fr amewo rk to hold c ont emporar y  so cie tytoge the r. P h ilosophy of technology e xami nes t h e u nderl yingas sumption s  ofhow tech n ologies impac t and transform hum a n so cie t yin  ways tha t a r e phi loso phi call y r elev a n t (K a plan ,  2 009a ). Whi le e ar li er philos op hers su c h as Pla to,Arist ot le ,  a nd
 invite_reflection, and_inspire debate on pertinent_ethical considerations_that_involve instructional_technology._The researchers argued_that by examining_the ethical dimension of_instructional technology, and_discussing_ethical values surrounding technology, researchers and educators can better promote a disciplined and ethically_informed_conversation about_technology_enhanced_learning (Lally et al., 2010)._In arguing for why educators_should examine_philosophical assumptions about technology, Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009)_asserted_"before approaching technology_integration in instruction, it is imperative to examine one's_own assumptions and beliefs about technologies_and their impact_on_human_users" (p. 77). Deeper_dialogue between 73 educators about technology_can better recognize cultural and moral_dimensions, and consider the positive benefits of_technology while identifying potential problems (Kritt_& Winegar, 2010). Philosophical assumptions_that technology_drives society and education can_be dehumanizing, and_despite technological_utopian rhetoric that_sees technology as leveling social inequalities,_a digital divide_for students with disparity of access_to_technology continues to_persist_(Fuchs,_2009; Strobel_& Tillberg-Webb, 2009)._Technological_development may_enhance_the advantage of some regardless of_the_expense to others (Sabatino, 2007), and development_driven by competition and_market_forces may not serve_the common good (Kritt &_Winegar, 2010). Selwyn (2010b) argued that_a critical_approach to_educational technology research would be more cognizant of social justice issues_concerning equitable access to digital technology._Assumptions characterized by technological_determinism can_find_educators facing pressure_to_keep up_with technology or fall behind, and educators_may feel_like they have little sense of_agency in a world_run_by technology (Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009)._Kritt and Winegar (2010) considered the_question whether technology will be_transformed_by_its human users, or whether_people will be more transformed by_technology. Kritt and_Winegar (2010) argued for the importance of_human_agency directing future evolution of educational_technology._The critique of technological determinism that_follows_later_in the literature review will_examine and critique this theory of_technology in depth, including different variations o f the_technological determinist perspective._74 Foundations in Philosophy of_Technology_Franssen_et al. (2009) asserted that technology is a major cultural_and economic_force that operates_as a framework to hold contemporary society together. Philosophy of_technology examines the underlying assumptions of how_technologies impact and transform human society in ways that are philosophically_relevant (Kaplan, 2009a). While earlier philosophers such as_Plato, Aristotle, and