Tom Hoffman's rant and Dilbert's experience with technology have much in common. Tom seems to want to place the blame for failures in educational technology on the companies who have delivered new technologies at a faster pace than than anyone can possibly keep up with (including educators). Dilbert, on the other hand, deals with the current reality and just moves on, in spite of the technology. My vote goes to Dilbert. Tom, on the other hand, needs a prescription for reality. Educators are not, nor have they ever, been at the controls of the technology train; and, just because the train left the station without most educators on board is neither the fault of the train or the educators...it is simply the reality of today's pace in the world of profit based, competitive technology. Tom is a wonderful proponent of open source code and the empowering possibilities of user development and shared resources. The businesses who deliver the software that Tom seems to malign would not stay in business by giving their products away. The software giants may ultimately become vulnerable to the grass roots community of open source developers, but not any time soon.
This is a wicked cycle. Educators, and many institutions who train educators, have not embraced technology nor have they empowered new educators to understand the good and the bad of technology in education. When faced with an unfamiliar technology, we wonder why educators seem to lag in acceptance of a technology that often times has already been integrated into the lives of the students. By the time educators wake up to a 'new technology', aquire training in it's use, incorporate it into the curriculum, and research it to oblivion...the technology is no longer 'new' and the students have already moved onto someting else. There is no slaying of the technology dragon, just an interesting chase.