I agree with Ken Mitchell points that the learning outcomes should be in the foreground of technology based instruction, rather than the technology. However, I was not so sure about his point:
[quoting Mitchell, 25 Apr 95] ...the curriculum design for use within a technology delivered environment should not be too different from the development of a curriculum outside a technology delivered environment, because it is the message that is the most important component to the end user, the student.
All communication is mediated by the medium that is used to deliver it. The mode of delivery has an important influence on the quality of the communication. To design a curriculum in the same way as the classroom is not a very effective way of using a medium, and may result in poorer quality learning outcomes. In my line of work (videoconferencing) it is extremely important to design the curriculum with the advantages and limitations of the medium in mind. (For example, some types of interaction are much more difficult to achieve with videoconferencing than in a classroom, influencing the range of tasks that can be included in a course offered by videoconferencing. I think it is important here to realize that the content of the curriculum is more than just facts and knowledge, it can also include tasks and activities that are designed to aid in the acquisition of new skills.)
In summary, I agree with Ken that the learning outcomes should be the most important component in designing educational material to be delivered through new technologies. I also agree with his point that the content is very important, though I would argue that the content of a curriculum delivered via technology is mediated by the technology. To ignore this and pretend that education delivered through technology can be the same as that delivered in a classroom is to use the technology in a very limited way that could have negative effects on the effectiveness of the course.