International comparative tests, like PISA 2006 and TIMSS 2007, show that Norwegian 15-year-olds’ competence in literacy, numeracy and science is far lower than other countries with which we compare ourselves. In addition to this, Norwegian girls score significantly higher on the PISA reading literacy scale and outperform boys in measures of reading achievement. This has led to a national concern about the Norwegian school system and a heated discussion about the organization of the education and the use of different teaching methods. “The Primary and Lower Secondary Education Act of 1998” demands that all Norwegian children receive an adapted education. In order to promote differential learning and to support student-centred methods, work plans have become a frequent set up in Norwegian classrooms (Mejding & Roe 2006; Kjærnsli & Lie 2003; Lie 2001). A work plan is a document of academic work that describes what the pupils are supposed to do in different subjects over a specific period of time. Today, work plans have become an integrated part of the Norwegian everyday school-life. Because the tasks on the work plans often are differentiated according to available time, rate of work, progression, content, number of tasks, grade of difficulty and working methods these documents have become one of the most important tools Norwegian teachers have in order to put individual instruction into practice (Klette 2007). A lot of teachers open for self-directed learning, and they use work plans in order to organize this sort of education. The pupils themselves are then responsible for organizing and planning their own academic learning, often realized through the use of study lessons. During study lessons the pupils can choose which school subject they want to study. The main focus of this paper will therefore be to see how girls and boys use work plans during mathematics and science lessons in Lower secondary school. I am interested in what kind of strategies they make use of in order to finish the work plan on time and possible differences between the two genders. In my discussion I will draw on videotaped interviews with 15-year-olds from mathematics and science classrooms in Norway who are heavily using work plans in their everyday school-life. My analysis will focus on: • In what way do girls and boys organize the work plan period?

The analysis will draw on videotaped interviews with 20 girls and 20 boys from mathematics and science classrooms. In the analysis I focus on: What kind of strategies do girls and boys use when working with work plans? In what way do girls and boys cooperate when working with work plans? When do they approach the teacher? Who are they asking for help? Who are they cooperating with? The interviews are analyzed with respect to girls and boys strategies when approaching the work plan and organizing the work plan period. The data rise from a lager video material (PISA+) which seeks to throw light on the problematic PISA findings in the Norwegian context while looking at offered learning activities and experienced learning activities. PISA+ (Project on Learning and Teaching Strategies in Schools) is based on video studies from six 9th grade mathematics, science and reading classrooms in Norway.

Preliminary analysis indicates that: Girls and boys strategies in relation to work plans are: Girls • Working with the plan at home – want to do the tasks neatly. • Cooperating on tasks during study lessons. • Work a lot during study lessons. • Work with math tasks in the study lessons following directly after the lesson in mathematics. • Working with subjects according to which subject teacher who is present. • Spread the tasks throughout the whole period. Boys • Work with the plan at home. • Work individually with the work plan. • Do little academic work during study lessons. • Want to finish the plan quickly. • Do not bother if the subject teacher is present or not – the main thing is to finish the plan. • Begin with mathematics – finish the period math tasks after two days.