In the last decades, in most of the Western world, there has been a remarkable emphasis on changing the conditions of the development of higher education (HE). A flood of educational reforms has been produced concerning the development of HE on international, organizational and institutional levels (Waks, 2007). Internationalisation of HE and the question of quality assurance are continuously debated, a debate related with the development of standards, which in turn, have the mission for developing HE into the 21st century (Barnett, 2007, 2005). Also, ICT and the impact on learning and the shape and space of new forms of learning contexts, have had a huge impact on today’s general conditions present in HE (Wihlborg, in press; Svensson & Wihlborg, sub). The main question addressed in this paper is not concerned with these changes per se, rather, the interest is/lay on how the impact of these conditional changes can become visualized, or traced, in teaching and learning situations. Waks (2007) raise an important question, partly by referring to Cuban (1992) and his discussion about curriculum stability and change and the meaning of ‘educational change’ (ibid. p. 280). Waks saying/…/the anomalies and contradictions of the mainstream system are becoming clearer, particularly in relation to the lack of fit for the schools with the emerging occupational structure.” (ibid. pp. 294-295). Another important question that will outline the discourse of HE for the 21st century will concern our view on mass-education. Many authors assert that there is a need of ‘reshaping the university’, Barnett (2005), and reframing the meaning of development of knowledge and the goal of education in today’s information intensive society and the influences of ICT and Cyborgs (Gray et al 2001). In this dimension is also an important question concerning, variation of ontologys of knowledge, such as the differences about eastern and western views on knowledge, Dahlin (2004), and that of accessibility to knowledge. We experience that there is a risk and threat against what we, today, consider as a ‘valid HE’. On the other hand we also see it as an opening and possibility for/in supporting a development, by radically change the present agenda of HE. Changes that presuppose that we make use of organizational anomalie and contradictions, and by doing so, support the development of a new discourse in HE. Recognition of this conflict/struggle will lead to data we consider make it possible for to ‘reconsider’ and change our pedagogical practice concerned with HE.

The conflict is reflected in teaching and learning situations and within the educational context. The study’s data comprises various text documents, for instance chat material, between students and students, chat material based on collaboration between students and teacher(s). E-mail correspondence text, feedback from teacher to student and between students. Marratech meetings involving teachers and students elaborating together. The material is so to speak at one point audiovisual and saved as text (audio-taped). A content analysis, Burnard (1991, 1995) drawing on Glaser & Strauss (1967) is used. The analysis aimed at describing various abstractions in terms of themes/categories. Some concepts became prominent, by appearing in a distinct way when analysing our data. In turn, each concept could be allocated to one of the main theme and are described in Table Y (in progress). As theoretical tools (framework) Engeströms’ (1987, 1991) ‘use- and exchange values’ will be used in the interpretation process.

On one level, the results in this study will describe an understanding of the didactical tensions in the activity of higher education, involving crucial conditions vs. its relation to learning and development. Through this tension, struggle, conflict we aim at pointing out the potentials for development, that is, exploring what change-agents that might become possible stepping stones for re-shaping the agenda for higher education.