The limited number of studies on practice variability that have used children as participants seem to indicate that children do not benefit from contextual interference as much as adults do. This study tested the effects of three practice schedules on the learning of three field hockey skills (push stroke, drive stroke and dribble) with fourth and fifth grade students (N=60). The three practice schedules (blocked, progressive-block and random) represent three levels of contextual interference, with blocked having the highest level (practicing all three skills every day). For the push and the drive, the dependent measure was the distance traveled by the ball whereas for the dribble it was the time taken to complete a figure eight obstacle course with eight cones. All groups ultimately had the same amount of practice on each skill. Analysis of the data for the push showed a significant time x group interaction. For both the post and retention tests the progressive-block and the random groups demonstrated significantly greater distances than the blocked group (p=.00). There were no significant differences between the progressive-block and random groups. For the drive stroke, similar results were obtained for the posttest, with the progressive-blocked and random groups performing significantly better than the blocked group. At the retention test, all three groups were significantly different from each other (p=.00) with the progressive-block group hitting the ball the farthest and the blocked group the shortest. The data for the dribble revealed that the progressive-block group performed significantly better than the blocked group (p=.00). The analysis of the variable error scores showed that for all three skills there were no significant differences between the three groups at the post and retention tests (p=.08). The findings of this study support the general superiority of practicing under high levels of contextual interference even for elementary school children. These results have not been typically reported for children, and should be considered in designing effective and more variable practices. For all three skills, the progressive-blocked group consistently produced better results than the blocked group.