Qwest, and AOL and Time Warner, and found that discourse characterized by technological determinism, and the inevitability of technology, served as a powerful narrative to justify the actions of managers (Leonardi & Jackson, 2004). Leonardi and Jackson (2004) found that leaders of organizations used technological determinist discourse strategically to suppress controversy and deflect the opinions of those opposed to the mergers, and mask alternate views and interpretations. Managers presented organizational change as being inevitable because technological change was viewed as inevitable, and the discourse of inevitability had a tendency to excuse managers from responsibility for their decisions (Leonardi & Jackson, 2004). If technology leaders assume that technology operates with its own autonomy, this presents a dilemma by limiting human agency and responsibility for technology (Fisher, 2006; Hofmann, 2006;o f the digital natives discourse can dismiss the opinions o f educators who may have legitimate concerns, and portray educators who may resist more radical change efforts as being out of touch (Jones & Healing, 2010). Empirical research on digital natives. Bennet and Maton (2010) argued that educators should move beyond debate characterized by digital natives rhetoric toward rationale debate based on researchable issues. Jones and Czemiewicz (2010) called for further research to examine the current reality of young people and their use of technology, in part to dispel technological determinist assumptions and rhetoric. Bennett and Maton (2010) conducted a review of research and concluded that the broad claims about digital natives were not supported by research evidence. Rather than students being inevitably changed by technology in