In a project with an overall aim to explore ‘what’s happening’ and ‘what’s possible’ in terms of how pupils made meaning about different subject content and what signified their interaction with each other and with the tools provided, we let young pupils create multimodal texts in small groups in different subject areas. In one sub-study, we analysed how the pupils positioned themselves and each other (e.g., by taking leadership over one’s peers, or by refusing to take part in the activity) through their multimodal interaction when jointly creating fairy tales by use of different tools, such as papers, pencils and crayons, or a digital application for making animations. In the study, we followed the process when pupils in a grade 2 classroom during three different small-group activities i) created handwritten fairy tales, ii) drew images, and then, iii) transformed them into animated multimodal texts by using a digital application. Data was generated through video-recordings, pupils’ multimodal texts (writing and drawings), teaching materials, and lesson plans. The study is theoretically grounded in the designs for learning (DFL) perspective and the Learning Design Sequence Model was used as an analytical tool (see for example Björklund Boistrup & Selander 2022, Kress & Selander 2012, Selander 2008). One aspect of the model concerns how students are positioned and how they position themselves during the teaching and learning activities. The teacher’s design for learning - including her planned activities and the resources made available for the pupils - appeared to have a great impact on what happened and what became possible for the pupils in their design in learning and what competencies the pupils could (and chose) to draw upon in the different activities. An important result was that the pupils positioned themselves and each other in quite different ways during small-group activities, e.g., if someone took a leading position while others acted as followers, or if their positions were more equal. The ways that these positions differed between activities could partly be explained by the different affordances of the resources provided, as well as the teacher’s design.