compete in a global economy with 21st century skills has been an important focus in recent education reform efforts (Schrum & Levin, 2008). The two main properties of the core category were pressure to keep up with technology, and resistance to technological change. The data shows schools are under pressure to keep up with the latest technology, and this pressure to keep up with technology has an emotional influence on technology leaders and other users of technology. The study provides support for the assertions of scholars such as Kritt and Winegar (2010), who discussed how technological change places pressure on schools to play a game of catch up, and Selwyn (2010b) who discussed how the rapid pace of technological change places pressure on educational technologists to keep abreastleaders as they deal with their perceived experience o f the inevitability of technological change. The core category is depicted as holding a greater relative weight. The figure depicts the two broad philosophy of technology perspectives in cognitive dissonance with each other, and situated within Technological optimism. The two approaches to educational technology decision making, Educational goals and curriculum should drive technology, and Keep up with technology (or be left behind), are 268 shown in cognitive dissonance with each other, and linked with their respective parent philosophy. The core category Keep up with technology (or be left behind) emerges as the primary concern of leaders as they deal with their perceived experience of the inevitability of technological change. While technology leaders emphasized that educational goals and curriculum drive