The essay’s main focus has been to investigate and analyze the political actions behind the 2015’s grade compromise; an agreement to introduce grades from the fourth year in primary school. Through a game-theory analysis, mainly based in Leif Lewin’s and Jörgen Herman's research on rationality in politics, this study examined the grade debate  during a fifteen year period. The primary task has thereby been to explain the grade compromise through game-theory. According to the study carried out it is possible to conclude that the conservative parties mainly used strategies as smart rhetorical actions and condemnation of the socialist school policies in order to achieve their goals. They also strategically tried to persuade the opposition to favor their policy. Finally, by postponing the decision process, concerning the grades from grade six, they could promote the election campaign in 2010 and maintain high influence in the government. The red and green parties had for a long time been having differing opinions regarding school policies and education, however, they started cooperating in order to promote their respective preferences. The strategies used were mainly small deviations from their own opinions to make the various outcomes more advantageous. After defeat they strategically embraced the new policy and made it their own to stay strong. The conservative alliance saw the compromise as a strategic way to implement their own policy without relying on the red/green governments execution. The red and green parties also benefited from the compromise. They did not have to discard and abandon their preferences, instead they could prevent the proposal from becoming another legislative change.