Two discourses are re-framing the educational debate in Denmark as well in other western European countries. The one points out the need of adapting the educational system to general changes in economic competition between highly developed countries, and it points out the need of focusing the education on developing students' actual competencies. The other discourse connects marketization of the educations with promoting of the free choice of the user and points out the need of transparency in the educational systems to qualify the choice of the user - claims for accountability. Both discourses meet in the current reform of the Danish upper secondary school (the Gymnasium). In 1999 the Danish Parliament passed a Development Programme 'for developing the education of the future' with special reference to the Gymnasium. The main purpose of this programme was to develop teaching in order to enhance the students' competencies and develop team teaching. In 2004 a reform of the upper secondary school passed the Parliament. A new curriculum to emphasize competence oriented teaching and learning was introduced. A time frame for cross-curricular teaching was introduced together with mandatory team organization of the teachers. Due to accountability considerations detailed plans for the teaching are demanded and must be published. At the same time political pressure from the German-inspired Bildung-tradition and conservative forces caused a back-to-basics wave to be considered. Despite the conflicting aims and despite the high ambitions, the reform can be considered a succes in the way that the main educational aims were reached. The students did to a very high degree obtain the desired competencies during work in the cross curricular projects. But the price has been relatively high in terms of teacher discontent and uncertainty. The presentation will outline som of the un-intended effects of the reform implementation due to teachers' feeling of insecurity and anger. The presentation will sum up the results as far as the teachers' is concerned. The findings has been derived from three research projects carried out during the reform process (1999-2005)1. An evaluation of the Development Programme leading to the current reform. The empirical data come form visits on 9 gymnasiums with large-scale projects. Interviews were performed with the experimental teachers and a reference group of teachers, and a questionnaire was completed by a representative selection of teachers involved in development projects (n=140). 2. A case study involving four high schools involved in experimental teaching including the whole school. A questionnaire was completed by all teachers and the school management (n=192) and interviews were made with representative teachers (n=18). 3. An evaluation of the first half year of the implementation of the reform. A research team followed the implementation process in three schools. The team performed focus group interviews with teachers (n=100) and a survey covering a representative sample of teachers (n=724) was completed. The results will be dislayed on different levels, and we will specially discussOn the organizational level most teachers were content with the team-collaboration with their colleagues. But at the same time they regarded the time necessary for meeting as waste of time and an administrative burden. Before the reform the taught curriculum was very different for different teachers at the same school in the same subject. The cross-curricular teaching forces the teachers to formulate a common curriculum causing a mainstreaming in content. The new time frames for cross-curricular teaching are arenas for new pedagogical practices - allowing many teachers to a re-traditionalization of the teaching in the subjects. Most teachers found themselves in a cross pressure between new demands from the reform and their own professional pride (and routine). This often led to a feeling of meaninglessness, often expressed in metaphors of loss, and a high degree of decoupling. It could also lead to a instrumental fullfillment of the reform demands and to stress. The main question is: Are we going to see a new level or a new concept of teacher professionalism including the ability to understand own teaching practice in the view of the teams' united practice - or are we going to se a fragmentation process: The teachers individual practise as decoupled 'islands' of patterns for the purpose of fulfilling competing requirements?