The issue of this study is how assessment in Individual Education Plans (IEPs) is expressed through targets and strategies for future learning, given to pupils in Swedish compulsory school. Drawing on socio-cultural perspectives and using qualitative content analysis as a method, the IEP is viewed as a tool for learning, and two models for analysing the textual aspects of this tool are developed.The results show that the being aspect – pupils’ personality and behaviour – is involved in target-strategy combinations in various ways. They also indicate difficulties in formulating targets and strategies that are concrete and individual. The content of the target-strategy types are discussed in relation to the tool-for-learning aspect. An increased focus on learning targets and concrete strategies, and a view of the individual as part of an adaptable learning environment, is suggested in the conclusion.

The focus of this study is gendered differences and similarities in the distribution of individual education plan (IEP) targets given to pupils in Swedish schools. IEP writing is seen as part of teachers´ formal assessment practice. Through qualitative content analysis of data, two main target types emerged: learning targets, related to school subject learning; and being targets, related to personality, behaviour and attitude. Whilst the distribution of learning targets in the different sub-categories was similar for boys and girls, clear differences were found in the distribution of different types of being targets. Possible reasons for the gendered distribution of being targets are discussed from a doing-gender perspective. In addition, the paper discusses what is actually assessed in IEPs, whether there is a relation between the `ideal pupil´ and gender and whether the strong focus on being aspects detracts from focus on learning aspects.

The present study concerns Swedish teachers' practices with regard to individual development plans (IDPs), which are mandatory for all students in compulsory school. The conceptual points of departure are taken from Wartofsky's distinctions between primary, secondary, and tertiary artifacts and the concepts of inscription and translation. A total of 15 interviews were carried out with teachers at various stages of Swedish compulsory school grade levels. A typology of three qualitatively different ways of perceiving and working with IDP emerged. The ways in which teachers implement the use of IDPs—that is, their IDP practices—vary depending on perceived purpose and local contextual conditions. In the discussion section, it is argued that the creation of a typology as a way of categorizing practices should be viewed as a way of conceptually generalizing the empirical material. Finally, the results are problematized in terms of the possible implications different practices may have for students.

The present study explores the dilemmas and related coping strategies teachers experience as part of their work with individual development plans (IDPs) in Sweden. Through qualitative content analysis of 15 interviews with Swedish elementary school teachers, the dilemmas and coping strategies were identified and analysed. From an activity theory point of view, dilemmas are seen as discursive manifestations of contradictions that exist within the activity system of instruction. The IDP dilemmas are interpreted as emerging from a central contradiction between trust in teachers’ professionalism vis-à-vis external steering and control. The three defined dilemmas are identified as involving time use (documentation vs. instruction), communication (officially correct language vs. pupil-friendly language) and type of assessment (summative vs. formative). Moreover, three qualitatively different dilemma management strategies were discerned.