Standards have become a major focus in education today as we attempt to assess student learning. National and State standards have been designed to provide physical education teachers with behavioral indicators that specify what students should know and be able to do (NASPE, 1995).In addition to national standards, many states have developed (or are developing) their own standards for physical education. Hard evidence describing the extent to which standards have actually impacted teachers and programs is still scarce, although anecdotal evidence exists in several states. New York State is among the forefront of states that have implemented learning standards in physical education. The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions that New York State teachers have regarding the impact of the National and State learning standards on teaching and curriculum as well as to examine some of the supports and barriers to implementation of the standards. Data was solicited via a Likert-scale attitude questionnaire from over 2,000 members of the NYS AHPERD. Although some of the survey data will be reported here as context, the focus of this poster will include data collected from narrative questions on the survey and in depth interviews with 20 teachers from urban, surburban, and rural districts across NY State at elementary, middle school and high school levels. In addition, documents (lesson plans, curricula, etc.) were examined. Narrative and interview data were analyzed qualitatively through constant comparison. Categories were developed and examined for common elements that ran throughout and tied them together; themes were then extracted from these categories. Results indicated that: 1. standards encouraged teachers to use assessment more frequently and more seriously than they used to; 2. standards gave teachers a common "technical language" to use as a basis for discussion of what's taught and how what's taught contributes to the accomplishment of the standards; 3. standards helped teachers plan for long term "outcomes" rather than just for activities from day to day; 4. standards encouraged better instructional alignment; and 5. administrators were key in assuring whether standards were implemented. There were also misunderstandings evident regarding the content of the standards - i.e. teachers did not always interpret the content of the standards accurately. Implications are drawn for State Associations, in-service training programs, and professional preparation programs.Keyword(s): assessment, national issues, professional development