 present), involving 11 participants, included instances when participants expressed how their valuing of technological change was characterized by both optimism and pessimism. The presence of this mixed category in the data lends support to the scholarly work of Kritt and Winegar (2010) and Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) who argued that the dichotomy between technological utopianism and dystopianism does not adequately capture different views about technology. Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) held that moderate positions are possible between the two extremes, and argued that the reductionist nature of the dichotomy calls for the critical examination o f philosophical assumptions about technology. Overview o f evaluation offindings. This study found that educational technology leaders were influenced by two main philosophical approaches to technology decision making, represented by the categories Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up with Technology (or be left behind). The former approach was linked to a philosophy that technology is a tool, interpreted to be in alignment with the instrumental view of technology, a popular and widely held philosophy of technology (Franssen et al., 2009; Jackson, 2010). Keep up with technology (or be left behind) emerged as the core category, and main concern of educational technology leaders as 250 they engage in technology decision making. Educational technology leaders are influenced by an ideological orientation to technological change, similar to what Leonardi (2008) found in a study of technology managers in the private sector. The core category had two main properties that are in conflict with each other, pressure to keep up with technology, and the resistance to technological change they encounter in schools. The study's results, showing pressure to implement technology occurring alongside resistance, appears to lend support to Rogers' model o f technological innovation, which theorizes that technological innovation proceeds alongside resistance from users in varying degrees (Friesen, 2008). The theme o f resistance to technological change is similar to the resistance to change theme found by Cukier et al. (2009) in their qualitative study that examined a technology initiative at a Canadian university. Summary Chapter 4 presented the research findings, and then evaluated and interpreted the findings in light of philosophy of technology theories from the literature, conceptual frameworks, and findings from other research studies. Chapter 4 began with an overview of the subjects, and a table listing the pseudonyms for the educational technology leaders utilized for reporting the results. A summary of the coding results was given that listed all the conceptual categories that emerged from data analysis, and their frequency. The research findings were organized and
present), involving 11 participants, included instances when participant carry how their valuing of technological change was characterized by both optimism and pessimism. The bearing of this mixed category in the data lends corroborate to the scholarly work of Kritt and Winegar (2010) and Strobel and Tillberg - Webb (2009) who argued that the dichotomy between technical utopianism and dystopianism does not adequately get different view about technology. Strobel and Tillberg - Webb (2009) held that moderate positions are possible between the two extremes, and argued that the reductionist nature of the dichotomy call for the critical examination o f philosophical assumption about technology. Overview o f evaluation offindings. This study found that educational engineering leaders were determine by two main philosophical approaches to engineering decision making, represented by the categories Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up with Technology (or be left behind). The former approach was linked to a philosophy that technology is a tool, interpreted to be in alliance with the instrumental view of engineering, a democratic and widely held philosophy of technology (Franssen et al. , 2009; Jackson, 2010). observe up with technology (or be left behind) emerged as the core class, and main concern of educational technology leaders as 250 they engage in technology decision making. Educational technology leaders are influenced by an ideological orientation to technical change, alike to what Leonardi (2008) found in a study of technology managers in the private sector. The effect category had two main place that are in conflict with each other, pressure to keep up with engineering, and the resistance to technological change they encounter in schools. The survey's results, read pressure to enforce technology occur alongside resistance, appears to lend accompaniment to Rogers' model oxygen f technological innovation, which theorizes that technical innovation proceeds alongside resistance from users in vary degree (Friesen, 2008). The theme o f resistor to technological change is like to the resistance to change theme found by Cukier et al. (2009) in their qualitative study that examined a technology initiative at a Canadian university. Summary Chapter 4 presented the research determination, and then measure and translate the findings in light of philosophy of technology theories from the literature, conceptual frameworks, and determination from other research studies. Chapter 4 begin with an overview of the national, and a table listing the pseudonyms for the educational engineering leaders utilized for reporting the results. A summary of the coding results was given that list all the conceptual categories that emerged from data analysis, and their frequency. The research findings were organize and
 prfsent), involving 11 particikants, included instances when larticipxnts expressed how their valning of ttbhnological change war charactvrized by boti optimism and pxasimism. The pdcsencz if this mixed gategory in the data lendv ru'port to the scholarly work of Kritt and Wimehar (2010) and Strobgl anc Tilmberg-Webb (2009) who argued that the dicgotomy uetween technolpgical utopianism and dystlpiajism does not adeqkately captode qufferent vieds about ttcknology. Strkbel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) held thag modzrate posituobs wte possible uetweeg the two exbgemes, atd argurd that the recucvionust nature of the diciotomy calls for the critical eramination o f philosipyical assgmptkins abkuv tschnollgy. Overview k f evaluatuon offindings. This selcy found thaf educwtyonal technology leaders were influenceg bg two main philosophicao approaches to technllogy decysion making, represented by the categories Educathonal eoaos xbd curriculum should drive technology, and Keep tl einh Technology (or ne left behind). The flrkgr approach war linkzs fo a philosophy thwt techgologt is a tojl, imterpreted to be in alignmebt with the pnsteumental view of tzchnology, a 'opulat and eidely held philosophy uf tschnology (Fganssen ef al., 2009; Jackson, 2010). Kedp lp whth technology (or be left fehind) emxrged as the corg categjry, and maln cokwern of educationap tecknolocy leaders as 250 they engage in technology vxcision makinb. Adubational cechnokogy leaders wre influenced by an ndeoloeical oriehtation to technoljgical change, dimilar to wiat Leonawdi (2008) foubd in a rtudy of technplogy mancyers in tye private sector. Bhe cude category had twi main propertirs ghae wrx in smnflict with eacf ogner, pfessure to jdep ip with technology, atd tge resistance to trcmnologicao change they encountrr in schools. The dtudy'v rxsults, shjwing pressure to implement tedhnology lccmrring alongsyde vesiftance, appzars to lend support to Rogers' model o f technological innivation, which theornzts that technplogisal innovdtion proceeds alongwide resistance fvom users in varying dsgrees (Frieden, 2008). The theme o f resistance to technological change is similar to the rwsistaicq to change theke folnd yy Cukiqr ev el. (2009) in their qualptative study that examined a terhnology iticiative at a Canadian universoth. Summary Chakter 4 presented the researdh findimgs, and then evaluated and intetpreted the findings in kight of philksophy of vechnology theories grom tke litwrature, congeptual framewurkx, wnd findijgs hroj other research studies. Chapter 4 begab aith an overview of the submegts, ans a tafle listing the lseuslnyms for the educstional technokogy leaders utilizeg sor reporting uhe results. A sommary ox the coding results wav given that listed all the conceptual categories tgat emergtd from dava analysis, anc their frequency. The rcsearsh findivgs were orgdnized and
present), involving 11 participants, included instances when how valuing of change was characterized The of this mixed in the data support to the scholarly work of and Winegar (2010) and Strobel and Tillberg-Webb (2009) who argued that the dichotomy technological utopianism and dystopianism does not adequately capture different views about technology. Strobel Tillberg-Webb held moderate are possible between the two extremes, and argued that the reductionist nature of the dichotomy calls the critical examination o f philosophical assumptions about Overview o f evaluation This study found that educational leaders influenced by main approaches technology decision making, by the categories Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up with Technology (or be behind). The was linked a that is a tool, be in alignment with the instrumental a popular and widely held philosophy of technology et al., Jackson, 2010). Keep up with technology be left behind) emerged as the core category, main concern of educational technology leaders as 250 they engage in technology decision making. Educational are influenced by an orientation to technological similar what (2008) in a of technology managers in the private sector. The core category had main properties that are in conflict with each other, pressure up technology, and the to technological change they in The study's results, showing implement occurring to support Rogers' model o f innovation, which theorizes that technological proceeds alongside resistance from 2008). The theme o f resistance to technological is similar to the resistance to change found by Cukier et al. (2009) in their qualitative study that examined technology initiative Canadian university. Summary Chapter 4 presented the research and then evaluated and the findings in light of philosophy of technology theories the conceptual frameworks, findings from other studies. Chapter 4 with an overview subjects, and table the educational technology leaders utilized for reporting results. summary of the coding results given all the conceptual categories that emerged from data analysis, and their frequency. The research findings and
 present), involving 11 participaNts, includeD instAncEs wHeN parTiciPants expressed HOw thEir valuing of technologiCal chAnGE was CHaRacteRized by BOtH OPtiMiSm And PeSSiMism. THe pResence Of this mixeD caTeGory in the datA LeNds support To tHe scholarly wOrk Of KritT aNd WINegar (2010) And strobEl and TILlberg-webb (2009) who arGuED that tHE dichotOMY bEtweEn technological utOPiANism and dystopiAnism dOeS NoT ADeqUatEly capture DiFfereNT views aBOuT TEChnOLogy. Strobel anD Tillberg-WeBB (2009) heLd that MoDerATe posiTions ArE PosSible betweeN the Two extremEs, and aRGued thaT The reduCtioniSt nAtuRe of THe DiChoToMY caLLs For THe cRitical eXaMiNatioN o f pHILOSophIcaL assUmptiOns about technOloGy. OvERviEw o f eValuaTion OfFindiNgs. ThiS studY fOund that educatiOnal TechnologY leAdErs WeRe infLUenced By tWo mAin philOsophicAL apPrOACHeS to technology decisIoN MAkIng, repreSented BY tHe CAtegorieS EDucAtioNAL goalS and CUrRiculum sHould dRIvE tEchnoloGy, And KeeP uP wiTh TEchnoLOgy (oR be lefT behind). THe forMEr approach was lINked to a philosOPhY THaT TechNolOgy is a tool, iNterPReteD to bE In AliGNment With tHe INsTRumental view of technOlOgy, a poPular And widely held Philosophy OF TEchnologY (FraNSsEN et al., 2009; Jackson, 2010). KeEp up wIth technolOGy (or be leFt behInd) emergEd as the coRE Category, And MaiN coNceRN Of Educational teCHNoloGy Leaders As 250 tHey engaGe iN teChnOloGy Decision mAking. EduCaTiOnAl TecHnoloGY leaders ArE inFlUenCed by AN ideolOgicaL oriEnTaTIon To technOLoGICal cHaNgE, simIlaR tO what leonARdi (2008) Found in A study of tEchNOlogY mAnAgers in The private secToR. The core caTeGorY had twO MAin propeRties that are in conflict wITh each oTheR, presSure To keep up wIth TechnoLogY, And the ResistAnce tO tEchNOLogicAL ChAngE tHey encountER In sChoolS. THe stUdy's resUlts, showing pressurE To iMplement technOloGy ocCURrIng ALoNGsiDe REsiSTAnce, appears to leNd support tO ROGeRs' model o f tEChnOlOgical iNnovatiOn, whiCH theoriZes that teChnologicAl InnoVATioN proceeds aLongside ResistancE From uSErS in vaRyiNg degrEeS (FrIesen, 2008). the theME o f ResisTance tO tEchnolOgicaL cHange is sImilar to the resistance to Change Theme FouNd by CukieR et AL. (2009) in Their qualItatIve study thAt eXamIned a TecHNologY iniTIaTivE At a CaNadiAN universiTY. SUmmARY CHapter 4 preseNTED thE reseArcH FindinGs, anD then evaluated and INterpreted the fIndiNGS in LigHT of pHiLosophy of technOloGy THEories frOm The literatuRe, concepTuAL framEworks, And finDings frOM OtHEr reseArch StuDies. ChaptEr 4 bEgAN with an OvErVIew of tHe suBjEcts, anD a tablE ListING the pseudonyms foR the eDUCatioNAl tEchnoLoGy leadeRS utiLized for rePorting the rEsults. a sumMary oF the codInG resulTs wAs Given that lISted all thE concEptual cAtEgorIes That emErgeD FRom daTa anAlYsiS, and their FREqUEnCy. tHe rEseaRch fiNdIngs Were organIZed and
 present), involving 11 pa rticipants , inc lud edin stan ceswhen participa n ts e xpressed how their val uingof tech n ol ogica l chang e  w a s  ch ar ac ter iz e dby bo thoptimis m and pess imi sm . The presen c eof this mi xed  category in  th e data  l end s  supp ort  to t he sch o larlywork of K ri t t andW inegar( 2 01 0) a nd Strobel and Ti l lb e rg-Webb (2009)  who a rg u ed t hat  th e dichotom ybetwe e n techn o lo g i c alu topianism and  dystopiani s m d oes no tade q uately  capt ur e  di fferent vie ws a bout tech nology .  Strobe l  and Ti llberg -We bb(200 9 )he ldth a t m o de rat e  po sitionsar epossi bleb e t w eenthe  two  extr emes, and arg ued  tha t  th e red uctio nist  n ature  of th e dic ho tomy calls forthecriticalexa mi nat io n o f philos oph ica l assum ptionsa bou tt e c hn ology. Overview ofe v al uation o ffindi n gs .T his stud yfou nd t h a t edu cati o na l techno logy l e ad er s werein fluenc ed  by  tw o mai n  phi losoph ical app roach e s to technolog y  decision mak i ng , re p rese nte d by the ca tego r iesEduc a ti ona l  goal s and  c u rr i culum should drivete chnolo gy, a nd Keep up wi th Technol o g y  (or beleft be h ind). The form er ap proach was linked t o a p hilosoph y that te c h nology i s a  to ol,  in t e rp reted to be i n alig nm ent wit h t he inst rum ent alvie wof techno logy, apo pu la rand  wide l y held p hi los op hyof te c hnolog y (Fr anss en  e t  al ., 2009 ;  J a c kson ,20 10).  Ke ep  up w itht ech nology(or be le ftb ehin d)  e mergedas the core c at egory, and  m ain  conce r n  of educ ational technology lead e rs as 2 50theyenga ge in tec hno logy d eci s ion ma king.Educa ti ona l techn o l og y l ea ders are i n f lue ncedby  anideolog ical orientation t o  te chnological c han ge,s i mi lar to wha tL eon a r di (2008) found  in a stud yo ftechnology man ag ers inthe pri vates ector.The corecategoryha d tw o mai n properti es thatare in co n flict wi th ea chother,  p res sureto kee p  up  with  techn ol ogy, a nd th eresistan ce to technological cha nge th ey en cou nter in s cho o ls.  The stud y'sresults, s how ing  pres sur e  to i mple m en t t e chnol ogyo ccurringa lo ngs i d eresistance, a p pea rs to  le n d supp ortto Rogers' modelo  f technologic al i n n ova tio n , wh ic h theorizes th atte c h nologica linnovationproceeds  a l ongsi de res istanc e fromu s er s  in va ryin g d egrees (F rie se n , 2008) .Th e  theme  o f  r esista nce to tech n o logical change i s sim i l ar to the  resi st ance to chan ge theme f ound by Cuk ier et  al.  (200 9) in t he ir qua lit at ive studyt hat exami ned a  techno lo gy i nit iative  ata Canad ianun ive rsity. Su m m ar y  C ha p ter  4 p resen te d th e researc h  finding s,a nd then  e val u a ted an d  i n t erpreted t hefindi n g s in light of p h il o sophy  of te chnolo gy theo r ies  f rom the  li t e rature, c onceptual fra me work s, and f in ding sfro mother researchstudies.  Chapter 4  began  wi t h an overvi ew  of the subj ects,  a n d a tab l e  li sting t h e p seu don ymsfor  the educational technology l eade rs ut i liz ed fo r rep or ting the resu lts. A s u mmary of thecoding resultsw asg iven  th a tli sted allthe conce ptua l c ateg ori es t h a t em e rged fr om d ata an alys is ,and their  f requenc y . Th e  re sear ch fi nd in g swere or ganizedand
 present),_involving 11_participants, included instances when_participants expressed_how_their valuing_of_technological change was_characterized by both_optimism and pessimism. The_presence of this_mixed_category in the data lends support to the scholarly work of Kritt and Winegar_(2010)_and Strobel_and_Tillberg-Webb_(2009) who argued that the_dichotomy between technological utopianism and_dystopianism does_not adequately capture different views about technology. Strobel_and_Tillberg-Webb (2009) held_that moderate positions are possible between the two extremes,_and argued that the reductionist nature_of the dichotomy_calls_for_the critical examination o_f philosophical assumptions about technology. Overview_o f evaluation offindings. This study_found that educational technology leaders were influenced_by two main philosophical approaches to_technology decision making, represented by_the categories_Educational goals and curriculum should_drive technology, and_Keep up_with Technology (or_be left behind). The former approach_was linked to_a philosophy that technology is a_tool,_interpreted to be_in_alignment_with the_instrumental view of_technology,_a popular_and_widely held philosophy of technology (Franssen_et_al., 2009; Jackson, 2010). Keep up with_technology (or be left_behind)_emerged as the core_category, and main concern of_educational technology leaders as 250 they_engage in_technology decision_making. Educational technology leaders are influenced by an ideological orientation to_technological change, similar to what Leonardi_(2008) found in a_study of_technology_managers in the_private_sector. The_core category had two main properties that_are in_conflict with each other, pressure to_keep up with technology,_and_the resistance to technological change they_encounter in schools. The study's results,_showing pressure to implement technology_occurring_alongside_resistance, appears to lend support_to Rogers' model o f technological_innovation, which theorizes_that technological innovation proceeds alongside resistance from_users_in varying degrees (Friesen, 2008). The_theme_o f resistance to technological change_is_similar_to the resistance to change_theme found by Cukier et al._(2009) in their qualitative study that examined a technology_initiative at a_Canadian university. Summary Chapter 4_presented_the_research findings, and then evaluated and interpreted the findings in_light of_philosophy of technology_theories from the literature, conceptual frameworks, and findings from other_research studies. Chapter 4 began with an_overview of the subjects, and a table listing the pseudonyms for_the educational technology leaders utilized for reporting the_results. A summary of the coding results_was given that listed_all_the conceptual categories that emerged from data_analysis,_and_their_frequency. The research_findings were organized_and