Description: The paper presents part of a PhD. project where the aim is to investigate student teachers' construction of teacher competence and to investigate the differences and similarities between how the policy plans address teachers' competence and how the students talk about the same issue. Knowledge production in teacher education is a complex activity. Because of the variety of political, professional and personal expectations confronting a teacher, the educational plans for teacher education are ripe with pedagogical values and beliefs. In addition, the values are contradictory (Heggen 2005). In official documents today, teachers are described as the most important ministers of the knowledge capital. They are subsequently also responsible for the country's future economical growth. Also, the individual teacher is responsible for every child's well being and development. Inclusion of all children in the public school up to grade 13 is a core idea for the social-democratic school of Norway (Tolo 2005). The question is what kind of direction does this rather confused body of knowledge give to the development of the professional teacher? Methodology: Based on results from an empirical study of teacher students' constructions of competence, this paper will present and discuss contradictory ideals and expectations from society and politics that influence the shaping of a teacher. Teacher competence is seen as constructed through different narratives presented by the informants. The project is based on a understanding of teachers' competence as narratively and discursively constructed (Goodson 1992; Clandinin and Conelly 1996; Mishler 1999; Clandinin and Connelly 2000; Søreide 2001; Søreide in press). The production of empirical data has the one year teacher education programme at the University of Bergen as a point of departure. This education is accessible for students with a degree in language, natural science or social science. From September 2005 to February 2006 I follow 3 students in teacher education. I have web-based dialogues with them, and I will also conduct one interview with each of them towards the end of the period. My questions to them circle around the following research questions: What do they perceive as teacher competence? When do they observe something that may be labelled as teacher competence? Where, when and how do they develop their teacher competence? Conclusions: Preliminary results show that the informants need to use their own life experience as an important tool in the teaching. At the same time they express that their competence in the teaching subjects is of vital importance for success in the classroom. The political rhetoric of ministering the knowledge capital and teachers' direct responsibility for the national economical growth seems not to be reflected in the empirical data.