With authentic, or real life assignments students in the technical prevocational education ('vmbo' in the Netherlands) are working and learning in large 'practice' workshops. The students themselves are responsible for the communication with the 'customer' and the final product of the assignment. Is it possible to integrate technical mathematical knowledge, models, in this setting? Can the workplace become 'knowledge rich' (Guile & Young, 2003)? Starting point for the general research question is the distinction 'Providing versus Generating' that Rosenshine, Meister & Chapman (1996; Van Dijk, Van Oers & Terwel, 2003) make. This distinction will be explored in this project with the research question:Is it more effective to give students ready made models, or is it more effective to let them learn - with guidance - how to design models themselves in the context of an integrated learning environment (workplace simulation).The distinction that Rosenshine et all. make is strongly inspired by a individualistic (cognitive) learning theory. We rephrase this in the distinction 'providing versus guided co-construction'. Core question is how the learning process develops and how it can be advanced. In technical education, it seems that the knowledge gathered in lessons disciplinary theory not always applies on designing and working out a practical assignment. Students do not connect mathematical knowledge with the practice of constructing. This leads to a loss of motivation and a lesser learning outcome in terms of understanding and transfer. The challenge for the innovative prevocational education is to motivate students by providing assignments that are meaningful for them and at same time have possibilities for experiencing engineering on a deeper level and reflecting upon it (i.e. Van der Sanden, Terwel & Vosniadou, 2000).The research project is a design experiment or a design based study. For this first part we collaborated with teachers and experts to design a experimental program, an assignment in designing and constructing. That program has been evaluated formatively. The assignment is authentic in a sense that it connects to the needs of the students and it is resembles a real life assignment that can occur in later vocation (Volman, 2005). This paper is a report of the first qualitative part of the study. In the case study we tried to visualize the learning processen in the classroom with three video cameras and video supported interviews (Clarke, 2002).Video data will be analyzed by means of pattern analysis (Terwel, 2005) and connected with scores on a pre and post knowledge test and two tests on students perception of the learning environment and their tolerance for uncertainty. The first impression of the results seems promising. Some interesting patterns are found and relations are explored.In the footage, that will be edited as a film, the teacher is heard saying: "Let your mind work!"Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181-221. van Dijk, I. M. A. W., van Oers, B., & Terwel, J. (2003). Providing or designing? Constructing models in primary maths education. Learning and Instruction, 13(1), 53-72. Guile, D., & Young, M. (2003). Transfer adn transition in vocational education: Some theoretical considerations. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engestrom (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing. Amsterdam: Pergamon An imprint of Elsevier Science. Van der Sanden, J.M.M., Terwel, J, & Vosniadou, S. (2000). New Learning in Science and Technology. In: P.R.J. Simons, J.L. van der Linden & T.M. Duff.y. (Eds.). New Learning: three ways to learn in a new balance [pp. 119-140]. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Journal of curriculum studies or Learning and Instruction or Journal of the learning sciences.