A recent trend in some physical education teacher education (PETE) programs has been to shift from focusing on generic teacher effectiveness to pedagogies specific to different curricular models (Metzler, 2000). The purpose of this study was to compare and contrast preservice teachers' (PTs) conceptions of the teaching-learning process while employing the skill theme (ST), games for understanding (GFU), and sport education (SE) models. Our goal was to identify similarities among and differences between PTs' foci while teaching within the three models with a view to making our PETE more model-based in the future. Participants were 12 PTs enrolled in a 5-week methods course and a 10-week early field experience (EFE) which took place at a local elementary school. During the methods course, PTs studied the pedagogies of the three models as well as teaching styles and effective teaching. During the EFE, PTs team-taught 19-lesson ST, GFU, and SE units to third, fourth, and fifth grade pupils. Class sizes ranged from 10 to 18 pupils. Data were collected by using the critical incident technique. Following each EFE session, PTs reported, in writing, anything which they found significant while teaching within the ST, GFU and SE models. In addition, the five supervisors of the PTs recorded salient incidents and conversations within a reflective log. Separate analyses were performed on the critical incident and reflective log ST, GFU and SE data by employing analytic induction. Results indicated that, regardless of model, PTs were concerned about planning, organization, management, and their use of effective teaching behaviors. While employing the ST approach PTs were more skill-focused and concerned about pupils' skill levels and their need for practice. During GFU lessons, PTs worried about their own ability to use indirect teaching styles and their pupils' ability to create games and comprehend tactics and strategies. During their SE teaching, PTs focused on their pupils' reactions to and enjoyment of various components of the SE model. In general, PTs appeared most comfortable with the more conventional and direct pedagogy involved in ST teaching and least comfortable with the indirect and fluid pedagogy used in GFU teaching. PTs with stronger teaching orientations wrote more in-depth critical incidents and appeared to have a better understanding of and be more open to employing the pedagogies of all three models. PTs with stronger coaching orientations struggled particularly with the GFU model and showed a preference for SE. Keyword(s): curriculum, professional preparation, research