When planning it was clear that the Health Related Physical Fitness instructional model (Haerens et al, 2001) would have been the obvious choice though due to the potential learning opportunities listed above and relevancy I wished to be both creative and innovative (ED-2318, Creativity & Innovation) in my planning and delivery respectfully as at that stage of placement I was much more confident being a student teacher as compared to the start of the year (Fuller, 1974).  Knowing the class group made this decision easier as they enjoy a cognitive challenge as well as the normal physical activity activities traditionally associated with physical education.   The only down side to my planning was my pairing and grouping of students during the class and peer discussions.  I paired the stronger with weaker as well as being mindful of students past experience of physical activity though in hindsight I should have also taken students enthusiasm into account.  There was a pair in almost every lesson at the start of the scheme who shared no enthusiasm for physical activity though were typically well behaved students.  Realising this sooner would have benefited students learning in these instances.

I enjoyed the structure of the lessons (Stolz & Pill, 2012) as a teacher as it was easy to get the ratio between theory and physical activity right compared to other structures such as the Sport Education model (Siedentop, 1994).