The purpose of this dissertation is to explore and shed light on the subject content within Physical Education and Health (PEH). The first aim of the study is to describe and analyse what knowledge is legitimate within the subject, in the syllabus, as viewed by teachers and during the realisation of lessons. The second aim is to clarify and analyse similarities and dissimilarities between these three levels studied. The theoretical framework used is curriculum theory, inspired by Linde’s and Bernstein’s theoretical work. In the field of formulation the material for analysis is the syllabus valid for the compulsory school, i.e. Lpo 94, and in the field of transformation it consists of semi-structured interviews with six PEH teachers who teach Year 9 in four different secondary schools. In the field of realisation the material involves 20 videotaped PEH lessons taught by the interviewed teachers. The empirical material was obtained during the 2003-2005 period. Issue-focused analysis is used, insofar as an analysis frame has been developed for the material, consisting of two analysis schemes, the first labelled Dimensions including four major categories. The first is movement with four subcategories: recreative, functional, formalised and aesthetic forms. The second major category comprises simple and complex concepts. The third and fourth are the inter- and intrapersonal categories focusing on the socialisation contents. The second analysis scheme has been labelled Qualities and contains the categories of understanding and ambiguity. The analysis shows that one can distinguish two largely dissimilar objects of learning in PEH, which differ most markedly between, on the one hand, the field of formulation (the “formulated object of learning”) and, on the other, the field of transformation and realisation (the “realised object of learning”). The contents of the field of formulation are largely reformulated in the field of transformation, but no major change takes place from the field of transformation to the field of realisation. The “formulated object of learning” primarily comprises functional physical exercise as well as conceptual development and the understanding of health and lifestyles. The “realised object of learning” consists of formalised sports but also of physical exercise elements, the concepts used being mainly simple concepts, and the focus lying primarily on a low degree of understanding and ambiguity. The results also indicate that PEH is weakly classified and non-paradigmatic from the point of view of its learning object. Consensus is low as regards what knowledge is considered legitimate within the subject. Finally, the study suggests a focus on the concept of “fysisk bildning” (e.g. physical education), which should be understood in relation to the two analysis schemes developed. This also entails the possibility of reproducing a previous culture of sport as well as producing and creating a new and more complex sports culture.