Diamondstone is interested in power in learning and teaching, and in subjects (individuals) who resist power by not accepting the meanings that a dominant culture constructs.
Diamondstone argues that the resisting subject is revisiting and rejecting a construction of meaning made by the powerful. Furthermore, Diamondstone sees potential in resistance, in the sense that the resisting learner often has to be resourceful in order to resist. Moreover, Diamondstone sees three, distinct spaces in learning and teaching: the first is the official discourse controlled by the teacher, the second is characterised by open resistance, and the third space, which also resists, but by using less overt, more subtle strategies (p. 2).
Resistance can be seen as deviant, even criminal behaviour, but Diamondstone’s argument is that resistance highlights flaws in the existing activity system (p. 9). Therefore, rather than suppressing resistance, it should be opened up to see what systemic flaws are exposed. That said, the implications of Diamondstone’s analysis would prompt a fundamental reconfiguring of the classroom, with the traditional power relations of teaching being unseated. Top-down authority, focused in the teacher, would no longer be valid if classroom practice was designed to expose structural flaws within the education system, and the wider economic and social system underpinning the classroom.
A key point in Diamondstone’s analysis is that meaning is not constructed in a vacuum. Instead, meaning is constructed within a tradition, and the privilege of constructing meaning is, within dominant culture, in the hands of the powerful. Hence, ‘We are consumers of meanings made by others as we go about the business of making meaning ourselves’ (p. 9) and thus there is an extent to which activity is dialectical, as it presupposes and relies upon tension in order for progress to be made, and in order for sense to be made out of experience. In practice, this means accepting some existing meanings, but also rejecting others, and constructing new meanings when the existing ones turn out to be no longer fit for purpose. I don’t think Diamondstone identifies fully who or what the powerful is/are, but she does expose revolutionary possibilities in Activity Theory.
Reference
Diamondstone, J. (2002) ‘Keeping Resistance in View in an Activity Theory Analysis,’ Mind, Culture and Activity, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 2-21.
Disruptive Technology Enhanced Learning 