Task and student production in the 21 century is the first large scale mixed method research project upon task based instruction and student production across subjects and grades in Denmark (Bremholm et al 2016). Theoretically, the project draws on a sociocultural understanding of multimodal text production and learning and didactic (Jewitt 2008, Wood, Bruner & Ross 1976). A second point of departure is results pointing to a strong relation between the quality of instructional task and the outcome of student’s production (Bryk Nagaoka & Newmann 2000). Other findings flag up the importance of open tasks with integration of ICT, cooperation and several methodological approaches support student production in subject domains and wider competences (Bures et all 2013, Koh, Kim & Luke, Allan 2009, Parsons 2008). Results from subject specific studies indicate something similar when it comes to students' productive work in L1, mathematics and science (Chandler-Olcott 2009, Stone 2014, Capobianco 2013, Capobianco, Nyquist & Tyrie 2013). The theoretical approaches combined with perspectives on the associations between 21^st century skills and developing pupils’ academic skills leads to the following research question: How is the relationship between student’s development of 21^st century skills and development of subject discipline learning manifested in students' products?

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17-66): Springer Netherlands. Bryk Nagaoka & Newmann (2000). Improving Chicagos schools. Authentic intellectual work and standardalized tests conflict or co-existence ? Bremholm, J., Hansen, R., & Slot, M. F. (2016). Task oriented instruction and student production in the 21. Century. http://pure.au.dk/portal/files/96294094/Elevopg_og_elevprod_i_det_21_rh_pr_sentation.pdf Bures, E. M., Barclay, A., Abrami, P. C., & Meyer, E. J. (2013). The reality of assessing "authentic" electronic portfolios: Can electronic portfolios serve as a form of standardized assessment to measure literacy and self-regulated learning at the elementary level? Canadian Journal of Learning Capobianco, B. M., Nyquist, C., & Tyrie, N. (2013). Shedding light on engineering design. Science and Children, 50(5), 58-64. Chandler-Olcott, K. (2009). Digital literacies. A tale of two tasks: Editing in the era of digital literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 71-74. Hennessey S., Ruthve, K & Brindley, S 2005 Teachers perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution and change Jewitt, C. (2008). Technology, literacy and learning: A multimodal approach. London: Routledge. Koh, Kim & Luke, Allan (2009) Authentic and conventional assessment in Singapore schools : an empirical study of teacher assignments and student work. Assessment in Education : Principles, Policy and Practice, 16(3), pp. 291-318. Parsons, S. A. (2008). Providing all students ACCESS to self-regulated literacy learning. Reading Teacher, 61(8), 628-635. Stone, Jennifer (2014) Group task, Activities, dynamics and interactions in collaborative robotics projects with elementary and middle school children. Journal of STEM Education vol. 15. Issue 1 Yelland, N., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2008). Learning by design: Creating pedagogical frameworks for knowledge building in the twenty-first century. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 197-213. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child. 89-100.