This study aims to discuss in what way the same data material unveil different outcomes based on what approach used: phenomenography or variation theory. ‘Conception’ is the unit of description in Phenome nography (Marton & Pong, 2005), and an analysis based on phenomenography focuses both the referential and structural aspect. In this study, students’ statements of what learning is, are analyzed. The distinction between the approaches lies in separating th e structural dimension between conceptions and within an object. Traditionally Phenomenography has focused the differences between conceptions of the same phenomenon, whilst Variation theory focuses on the internal structure within the object. The analysis describes how 198 students in grades seven to nine in the Swedish secondary school, describe what learning is. The results of the phenomenographic analysis unveil different pools of meanings of how learning is conceptualized differently. The results from the analysis based on Variation theory describes what aspects an features the delimited phenomenon ‘learning’ consists of. Hence, a combination of Phenomenography and Variation theory of the same data set bring an understanding of how differently the same phenomenon can be seen, and what critical aspects are included or excluded to define a category. On the other hand, critical aspects used in an analysis based on Variation theory do not describe the differences among ways of seeing the same thing, but the variation within the phenomenon, how it is and can be differently structured. Using ‘learning’ as the phenomenon is challenging, as the concept is abstract and imprecisely.