Abstract: Problem Statement: Physical education (PE) is an important facet of today's middle school curriculum.However, curricula differ between instructors and schools and the optimal method has not been specifically defined.PE4Life is a new curriculum that encompasses a philosophy that offers opportunities for partnership with the community and emphasizes health-related physical fitness.This philosophy differs from past curricula in that it steps away from predominately teaching skill-and sports-related components.Purpose: The aim of this project was to determine the differences between a traditional PE and PE4Life curriculum for measures of physical fitness.Approach: Two demographically similar middle schools were selected to participate in the study.One school adopted the PE4Life curriculum while the other used traditional techniques.Both schools utilized only licensed PE instructors.Sixth grade students were tested using the following assessments: Body Mass Index (BMI), PACER, curl-up, push-up, and sit-and-reach.All students were tested at the beginning of the fall and the end of the spring semesters of two consecutive academic years.Results: There was a significant difference between the two schools (F[1,202] = 22.67, p < .001)for PACER over the two academic years.PE-4L increased scores more than PE-T.BMI was also significantly different between schools over the testing period (F[1,294] = 3.91, p < .05).Conclusions: PE-4L had a decrease in BMI over time, while PE-T had an increase in values.Flexibility was consistently better among the students in PE-4L school and improved more in both Year 1 and Year 2. PE-4L was more favorable on the health-related fitness outcomes when compared to PE-T.While further investigation is warranted, these results suggest that PE4Life's focus on health-related physical fitness may be more beneficial for increasing fitness than traditional physical education.