This study aimed to examine the ability of adolescents to maintain breathing rhythm while swimming with and without goggles, in the context of pedagogical interventions for implementation of water competence skills, rather than simply teaching swimming technique (strokes). 25 females and 25 males, 12–13 years old, swam the front crawl both with goggles and without goggles. Distance covered and the ability to maintain breathing rhythm were evaluated by experts. For both girls and boys, the lack of goggles reduced the breath control. The boys in contrast to the girls, could "swim" (cover a distance) but did not have the “competence” to swim effectively/safely—with breathing rhythm—regardless of the goggle factor. Goggle-free swimming as an autonomous component of water competence is highly recommended in elementary swimming education. The following elements for pedagogical intervention in the area of water competence development are proposed: (1) the formatting of breath control on the basis of the student's preferred, simplest form of swimming (not strokes); (2) the a priori treatment of swimming goggles as an unnecessary teaching aid; (3) the gender differences in area of both adaptation in visual perception (the goggles factor) and motor control (breath control factor) should be considered.

The aim of this article is to address the familiar question "Which swimming stroke should be taught first?"The discussion is usually focused on breaststroke versus crawl.Provoked by these naïve discussions of which stroke should be taught first (as if stroking equals swimming, which it emphatically does NOT), the question was answered metaphorically in an earlier article "No Stroke First -All Strokes First" (Stallman, 2008a).Here in Part I we identify and describe six strokes, all of which might be a candidate for any learners 'very first' stroke.We describe them as beginning strokes.Having identified and learned which one that a learner finds to be their easiest, the learner should then acquire the others.This strategy not only places the learner's easiest stroke first but adds the other "beginning strokes" and launches an all-around foundation upon which all other strokes can more easily be learned.

The primary goal of this two-part project is to answer the rhetorical question of which strokes should be taught first, and which later (Langendorfer, 2013, Stallman, 2014a). As you have seen in Part One, we emphasize (as have many others) the need for a firm foundation before any stroke is introduced. When the learner is ready for propulsive motor competencies, there is no stroke which suits all as their first. In Part One we explored the “beginning strokes” all of which are candidates for any given learner’s first stroke. We also argued that after mastering their very first stroke the learner should learn the other, “first strokes.” This also broadens the base for the learning of other strokes as the learner advances to intermediate and advanced levels. Here in Part Two, we explore additional strokes, chosen as essential because of some unique quality which makes them the best solution in some specific, potential risk situation. They should, therefore, be included in any comprehensive, proactive aquatic educational program.

In this paper, I propose there are several crises in the aquatic profession and I explain what they are and how to address them using research and my own observations. I use an innovative questioning process to do this by asking you the reader a series of questions after which I explain each. The first crisis has to do with the quantity of trained swimming instructors relative to the population that they serve. In many western European and North American high income countries (HICs), the teacher:student ratios are declining and it is getting increasingly difficult to hire trained swim instructors. In low and medium income countries (LMICs), the ratios remain devastatingly low and allow few persons to receive formal swim lessons. The second aquatic crisis I address is the apparent lack of competence and experience of many swim instructors in both HICs and LMICs. Part of the issue appears to be that most novice swim instructors only teach for 1-3 years creating a large turnover in instructors. Due to the lack of experience, the likelihood of new instructors to be highly effective is dramatically reduced. Among many training agencies, public pressure has been to reduce the amount of time and expertise required to become certified. The final crisis relates to the aquatic curricula provided by the primary training agencies (e.g., American Red Cross, YMCA of the USA). For the most part, the validity and reliability of swimming curricula have not been evaluated rigorously. Few if any evaluations of the efficacy of swimming curricula have been regularly conducted. The primary measure of program success continues to be how many students are enrolled in programs rather than how well students had learned to swim. I propose an ongoing need to address each of these crises as a primary way to address the drowning crisis faced worldwide.

Background: Most drowning occurs after an involuntary fall into open deep water. Thus, the victim is usually wearing outer clothing. The added burden of clothing may reduce the chance of survival. Methods: Grade Four children (n = 490) swam a 200 m combined test, twice, half with outer clothing first, half without. The test included jump or dive into deep water, swim 100 m on the front, stop and rest 3 min front and back, swim 100 m on the back and climb out over edge of pool. Each skill was scored from 0 to 2.0, a perfect score being 12.0. The Wilcoxen Signed Rank test was used to test the significance of the difference between treatments. Total scores with and without outer clothing were correlated using the Spearman rho. Results: The average total scores were 10.65 without outer clothing and 8.55 with (of 12.0). The Wilcoxen Z score was 2.79, statistically significant at p = 0.005. The Spearman rho between the two scores was 0.41. Of those who were judged able to swim without outer clothing, a significant number were judged unable to swim with outer clothing. This was true at whatever level “can swim” was arbitrarily placed. Among those who scored best, the difference between without and with clothing was considerably less than among those who scored poorly. Conclusions: The added burden of clothing significantly affected skill performance. It cannot be assumed that one who can swim without outer clothing, can swim with. The moderate correlation between scores suggests that economical movement may be the quality which transfers from without to with clothing.

Objective:Little is known about the transfer of swimming skills from flat, calm conditions to outdoor, unsteady conditions. The aim of the present study was to investigate the velocity decrement of several life-saving, self-rescue and rescue related strokes when introducing waves of different heights.Methods:Thirty-three subjects swam twelve 25m sprints each, in a randomized order, in a 3x4 (wave height x stroke) design. The wave heights were flat, medium (ca 20 cm) or large (ca 40 cm), in a specially designed wave-simulating pool. The strokes studied were front crawl, head-up crawl, back crawl and breaststroke. A subgroup swam front crawl, head-up crawl and head-up crawl with fins. A repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant effect of stroke, F(3,23)=108 (p<0.001), showing that these four strokes have different levels of performance; and wave height F(2,24)=87 (p<0.001), showing that introducing waves reduced velocity, but there was no interaction effect. The fastest stroke in flat water was not surprisingly, front crawl, followed by head-up crawl, back crawl and breaststroke. When introducing medium or large waves, the order of strokes from fastest to slowest was identical to flat-water conditions. The average velocity decrement when introducing medium and large waves was 3% and 7% respectively. For the subgroup swimming with fins, this was the fastest stroke, followed by front crawl, and head-up crawl. This order did not change when introducing waves, and the velocity decrement was 4 and 2% for medium and large waves respectively (not significantly different from other strokes).Result:The conclusion is that the rank order of strokes does not change when introducing waves and that no stroke seems to perform relatively better in unsteady water compared to flat water. Other aspects than performance and velocity should be considered when choosing strokes for swimming in waves, these are discussed in the paper.

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ijare Part of the Exercise Physiology Commons, Exercise Science Commons, Health and Physical Education Commons, Leisure Studies Commons, Other Rehabilitation and Therapy Commons, Outdoor Education Commons, Recreation Business Commons, Sports Management Commons, Sports Sciences Commons, Sports Studies Commons, and the Tourism and Travel Commons

Brenner, Moran, Stallman, Gilchrist and McVan, (2006) recommended that “swimming ability be promoted as a necessary component of water competence, but with the understanding that swimming ability alone is [often] not sufficient to prevent drowning” (p. 116). Tradition and expert opinion are no longer enough. Science can now help us select essential competencies. What does research evidence show us about the protective value of specific individual personal competencies? Since the term “water competence’’ was coined by Langendorfer and Bruya (1995) and adapted for drowning prevention by Moran (2013), it has gained in use and acceptance. As a construct, it is indeed more inclusive than “swimming skill’’ alone for addressing drowning prevention. Our proposed taxonomy of water competencies re-emphasizes the need for a broad spectrum of physical aquatic competencies as well as the integration of cognitive and affective competencies. The purpose of this review article is to a) identify all the key elements of water competence, b) support each recommended type of water competence with examples of research evidence, and c) suggest areas requiring further research.

Drowning kills at least 372,000 people worldwide every year and is the 3rd leading cause of unintentional death, accounting for 7% of all deaths stemming from accidents (WHO, 2014). Conceptually, “drowning” is a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, characterized as a chain of events (Bierens, 2006). Drowning is defined as the process of experiencing respiratory impairment from immersion or submersion in liquid. Research on drowning as a phenomenon presents several difficulties - most of all, that global data concerning the number of occurrences are not accurate. Nevertheless, detailed analysis of the registered incidents allows the identification of risk factors of drowning. An in-depth analysis of the risk factors is the basis for the creation of targeted and effective strategies to prevent drowning. Due to variability of situations which could lead to a drowning episode, experts suggest the adoption of a multi-layer prevention model, rather than opting for isolated measures, since no single measure can prevent all deaths and injuries caused by submersion. Among the preventive measures we would like to emphasize instruction in swimming and water safety. So, what does "knowing how to swim" really mean? Some authors define mastery of this competence as swimming a given distance, while others put the emphasis on how this/any given distance is swum (Stallman, Junge, & Blixt, 2008). It has long been realized that there is no contradiction between learning those competencies which make a person less susceptible to drowning and those competencies which prepare the path towards higher levels of performance and competition. Aquatic movement researchers and practitioners and drowning prevention researchers and practitioners, share in the responsibility for drowning prevention though they are often unaware of it. The question “What should be taught to children?” is too infrequently asked. There remains great variation in what is taught and programs continue to be guided by tradition and expert opinion. The great variation is proof that we have not agreed on the content of learn – to – swim. The concept of water competence was launched in 1995 and emphasized both a broad repertoire of physical skills as well as knowledge and values. It was then adapted this to drowning prevention, defining it as “the sum of all personal aquatic movements that help prevent drowning, as well as the associated water safety knowledge, attitudes, and behavior that facilitate safety in, on and around the water”. The advent of the concept of “water competence” has opened the door for a revival of the interest in the development of a broad repertoire of physical aquatic skills and of the integration of both cognitive and afferent competencies. It also shifts the focus from “defining swimming” to a broader and more inclusive notion of which competencies can contribute to making people less susceptible to the risk of drowning. Water competence is a much more comprehensive and inclusive concept than 'swimming skill', since it also includes both cognitive and afferent competencies, making it especially relevant in the prevention of drowning. Nevertheless, drowning is a complex research phenomenon, as is its prevention. The concept of water competence is a living concept and still in development. Please keep yourself water safe!

whether he had an opinion, and he certainly did!Thank you very much, Professor Langendorfer.I also have an opinion (equally

Same Family: Two Branches-Collective ResponsibilityThe two branches of the aquatic research family have co-existed for decades: The aquatic movement researchers and the drowning prevention researchers.But they have not co-habited.Rather, they have behaved like estranged family members with limited contact, limited cooperation, and limited understanding.Indeed, they are still largely unaware of each other and of the huge potential mutual benefit that cooperation toward the same goals, to say nothing of the moral obligation to work together would accomplish (we discuss this more later).

Little is known about the transfer of swimming skills from indoor, flat, calm conditions to outdoor, wavy, unsteady conditions. The aim of the current study was to examine the differences in swimming, floating, and entry skills in children between calm and simulated open water conditions. Sixty-six children, 11 years of age, were tested on two occasions, once in calm water and once in simulated open water conditions. Testing consisted of a 200 m time trial, a 3 min back floating test, a diving entry, and a rolling entry. The results show an 8% decrement in performance on the 200 m swim between calm and unsteady conditions for those who completed the 200 m under both conditions. When weaker swimmers, who only completed 50 m of the 200 m test distance were tested, the performance decrement rose to 14%. The diving entry, the rolling entry, and the floating test had decrements of 16%, 21%, and 24%, respectively. We concluded that 11-year-olds should not be expected to reproduce swimming skills they have performed in calm water with the same proficiency in unsteady conditions during an emergency. KEYWORDS: swimming skills, floating skills, diving skills, children, simulated open water Language: en

Little is known about the relationship between real and perceived water competence among youth in the context of drowning prevention or of their perceptions of their risk of drowning. This study reports the findings of an international project entitled Can You Swim? The participants (n = 373) were assessed in a two-part study using an initial questionnaire survey to provide self-estimates of water competency and risk perception, followed by six practical tests in the water. Correlation coefficients between perceived and real swimming competency (rs = 0.369) and floating (rs = 0.583) were significant, but only moderate in strength. No significant gender differences in real or perceived swimming competency were found. Significantly more males than females estimated lower risk of drowning associated with a series of aquatic scenarios (p = 0.016). The implications of these findings on drowning prevention and the need for further investigation are discussed.

4 background the role of swimming ability in drowning prevention is arguably one of the most persistently problematic relationships in water safety education. While many argue that the value of swimming in preventing death by drowning is axiomatic, others suggest that the protective effect of being able to swim might be offset by the increased exposure to aquatic risk inherent in utilising that skill. defining exactly what is meant by being able to swim in the context of drowning prevention has proven to be equally as elusive. furthermore, overestimation of swimming ability and underestimation of risk of drowning has been well reported in the literature, especially among males. this international collaborative feasibility study set out to explore 'real' swimming competencies and compare results obtained in practical tests with participants 'perceived' ideas of their swimming competency. results as was to be expected, most of the students demonstrated good swimming skills with most being able to swim >400meters non-stop (n=282; 76.4%) and swim 100m on their backs (n=237;66.2%). Proportionally fewer students could float for 15 minutes (n=144; 39.9%) and more than one third could not stay afloat for more than two minutes (n=127; 35.2%). correlations between these skills and student self-estimates of their competency, while statistically significant at the 1% level (2-tailed), (swimming, p = .369; floating, p = .583 and back stroke swim, p = .191), were not as strong as had been expected with students tending to underestimate their swimming competencies. no significant gender differences in either real or perceived swimming competency were found. Some significant gender differences were evident when students were asked to describe their level of confidence in being able to do the activities in open water with more females than males likely to have concerns about diving headfirst into the deep end of a pool (p = .029), perform a surface dive to a depth of 2 m (p =.058), and perform a rescue tow (p = .002). Discussion as was to be expected from a cohort selected for programmes where aquatic activities were an ongoing part of their professional development, most students had a sound aquatic skill base. overall, student tended to underestimate their swimming competency and perform better than expected in the actual tests, though national differences were evident. no significant gender differences were found in self-estimated or actual swimming competencies. the implications of these findings on drowning prevention and the need for further investigation are discussed. Conclusion this is the first study of its kind that attempts to relate perceived swimming competency with real swimming competency among an age group that are generally identified as at high risk of drowning. further investigation using similar methodology is required to determine whether these findings would be replicated in other populations (without a background in physical education).

The aims of this study were to compare drag in swimming children and adults, quantify technique using the technique drag index (TDI), and use the Froude number (Fr) to study whether children or adults reach hull speed at maximal velocity (vmax). Active and passive drag was measured by the perturbation method and a velocity decay method, respectively, including 9 children aged 11.7+/-0.8 and 13 adults aged 21.4+/-3.7. The children had significantly lower active (kAD) and passive drag factor (kPD) compared with the adults. TDI (kAD/kPD) could not detect any differences in swimming technique between the two groups, owing to the adults swimming maximally at a higher Fr, increasing the wave drag component, and masking the effect of better technique. The children were found not to reach hull speed at vmax, and their Fr were 0.37+/-0.01 vs. the adults 0.42+/-0.01, indicating adults' larger wave-making component of resistance at vmax compared with children. Fr is proposed as an evaluation tool for competitive swimmers.

Lifesaving has come a long way since 1878 in Marseille, when the first world lifesaving congress was held. The last half of the 19th century and up to World War I saw a dramatic and worldwide increase in sea trade, augmented by improved technology. The oceans became crowded, while concerns for safety lagged far behind the increase in tonnage by sea (Golden & Tipton, 2002). An escalation in armed conflict fanned the fire. Drowning statistics were at an all-time high. A tiny but significant seafaring nation like Norway approached 750 drownings per year at the peak, nearly 8 times the current toll and, per capita, over 20 times as great as today (Solberg & Nesheim, 2006). Little wonder that both governments and private individuals became alarmed, and initiatives to reduce this tragedy emerged. Local efforts led the way, appearing in the form of awareness campaigns, resuscitation education, learn-to-swim campaigns, lifesaving programs, and sea rescue. Several major cities worldwide had already formalized ambitious programs (e.g., The Society for Rescue of Drowning Persons, Amsterdam, 1767, in Bierens, 2006). The seeds of national consolidation were sown, and the first national lifesaving associations were in their fetal stage. The Marseille conference gathered like-minded persons and organizations and institutionalized the need to share and to learn from one another. A secondary effect of the congress was that seeing the progress of others in the nationalization of lifesaving accelerated this development in other countries. The next 25–30 years saw the birth of dozens of national lifesaving associations. As we all know, the Federation Internationale de Sauvetage Aquatique was launched in 1910. World Life Saving came later (1971), catering to the special needs of surf lifesaving, and in historic meetings in Leuven, Belgium, in 1993, these were merged into the International Life Saving Federation (ILS) of today. Many of these national associations have flourished and achieved a high degree of professional competence and experience and have been able to reach a large portion of their citizens. Some have succeeded in the political arena, influencing their governments to establish certain safety standards. In spite of increased international contact, the national agencies have maintained strong cultural traditions. A considerable variety of philosophies, methods, techniques, and programs still exists. Within the aquatic-research community,