Aquaticity: A New Way to Assess Water Skills

by: Emily Weeks, Dr. Jo An Zimmermann, Dr. Stacey Bender

Have you noticed that swim lesson skills assessments are slightly different from one another? There are differences in public versus private entities or organizations such as American Red Cross versus YMCA to name a few. The real question is how do we know if these assessments are testing the right skills? It would be easier if there was a standard test to use when it comes to assessing swim lesson participants regardless of the type of swim lesson provider. Testing participants’ level of Aquaticity might become the new way of assessment.

Introduction and Rationale

The knowledge and skills of water safety are important as, “drowning is the 3 ^rd leading cause of unintentional injury death worldwide” (Facts & Stats About Drowning, 2018). When looking at just the United States, there is an estimated average of 3,960 fatal drownings per year (Drowning Data, 2021). These drownings range from public pools with lifeguards present to being on boats in open waters and no use of proper safety equipment such as Coast Guard approved lifejackets. Drowning can happen to anyone and technically does not discriminate, looking at some demographics there are concerning differences such as males have a higher risk of drowning with the overall mortality rate being twice as high as the rate of females. When looking at younger demographics, African American children have a 5.5 times higher rate of drowning in pools than Caucasian children (Facts & Stats About Drowning, 2018). Outside of these fatal drownings, “between 50-65 percent of Americans cannot swim well or at all” (Drowning Statistics, 2021).

Looking at how concerningly high these drowning statistics are, there is a cry for aquatic entities to provide quality swim lessons to the community with an emphasis on safety and overall risk management to establish safety in swimming lessons (Drowning, 2021). Current literature suggests drowning can be prevented by people becoming more comfortable and secure in an aquatic environment. One of the top ways to prevent drowning is learning basic swimming (which can reduce the risk of drowning by 88% percent), water safety skills, and life-saving skills such as basic CPR (Drowning Data, 2021; Facts & Stats About Drowning, 2018). There is a multitude of entities that provide swim lessons, but one entity, Campus Recreation (at universities across the United States), is the focus of this paper.

Lack of Equal Access

There are a lot of swim lesson providers and by looking at one, Campus Recreation, you can see a difference even within a similar type of provider. In Texas, for example, there are large variations between swim lesson programs at the University of Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Texas State University. While each one uses certified instructors to teach their lessons, there are differences in the types of offerings at each university. The biggest variation is regarding price. Looking at the University of Texas (UT), they offer one-on-one lessons for students and members only. UT pricing ranges from $25-$30 for a 30-minute private lesson (Private Swim Lessons, 2022). Texas A&M offers adult group lessons and youth group lessons ranging from $8-$12 for a 30-minute lesson (Texas A&M Recreational Sports, n.d.). Texas Tech offers adult group lessons, youth group lessons, and private lessons ranging from $15-$19 for a 30-minute lesson (Youth Swim Lessons, 2022).

Lastly, Texas State University offers youth group, adult group, and one-on-one lessons with prices that range from $5-$16 for a 30-minute lesson (Swim-Lessons, 2021). This variation in prices plays a huge role in access, “79% of children with incomes less than $50,000 have few-to-no swimming skills” (Stop Drowning Now, 2018). Furthermore, these children grow into adults that have few-to-no swimming skills that avoid the water, are unable to teach their children water safety, and/or are self-conscious about taking swim lessons as an adult. With campus recreation offering lessons to children, it helps build a foundation for water safety as they grow into adults, but also helps reach young adults who did not have the opportunity to learn water safety and swimming skills when they were children.  Offering swim lessons as a means of preventative drowning is important, but it is crucial to consider equal opportunity when setting the prices of swim lessons.

In searching for a single method for evaluating swim lessons, regardless of the type of lesson or entity providing it, we identified a concept known as Aquaticity. Aquaticity is a term historically used in many biological disciplines to indicate the level of being aquatic (Varveri et al., 2016). More recently it has been used within a variety of disciplines to describe how comfortable or successful humans are when in the water. Varveri et al. (2016) created and validated an Aquaticity Assessment Test (AAT) as a means of measuring Aquaticity in humans. The AAT assessment tool is comprised of 10 aquatic tests to address “four components of human aquaticity: 1) physical conditioning, optimization of swimming technique; 2) psychological and emotional conditioning; 3) breath-hold capacity (apnea) and diving ability; and 4) anthropometric characteristics” (Varveri et al., 2016).

Methods

The purpose of this study is to look at a subset of a larger study designed to test a relationship between improvement in the level of Aquaticity and intrinsic motivation of swim lesson participants. Data was collected for a pilot study of the methods in fall 2021. Study participants were university students enrolled in either Campus Recreation swim lessons or a structured aquatics class in the Department of Health and Human Performance. Consenting participants complete both a pre- and post-participation assessment that includes a physical skills test and a quantitative survey that assesses motivation. We chose to reduce the physical skills tests (AAT) from the original 10 skills to 6 of them as we felt they were most appropriate to swim lessons. Each component is scored on a scale from 0 (does not perform) to 5 (successfully performs the task with advanced complexity) points. This skills test takes approximately 10-15 minutes to complete, and there is a minimum of a two-minute break between each component test. Note – using three (3) stations we tested a group of 22 students in 25 minutes. The 6 skills are:

1. The first component assessing surface buoyancy and balance will consist of the participants attempting to maintain both supine and prone floating positions without any motion in upper or lower limbs.
2. The second component will consist of assessing breathing control by having the participant exhale inside the water rhythmically.
3. Component three will consist of assessing underwater hydrodynamic position by having the participant perform an underwater glide.
4. Component four consists of assessing surface freestyle swimming technique. The participants will attempt to swim for 25 yards using the freestyle swimming technique.
5. For the fifth component, participants will be assessed on their physical fitness in water by attempting to swim continuously for 3 minutes using any type of swimming style.
6. For the final, and sixth, component, participants will be assessed on their ability to tread water.

Intrinsic Motivation

In addition to the swim skills data, we also gathered quantitative data from each participant to survey their intrinsic motivation related to the swim lessons they were taking. We used an Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) which is a multidimensional measurement device intended to assess participants’ subjective experiences related to a target activity in laboratory experiments. The instrument assesses participants’ interest/enjoyment, perceived competence, effort, value/usefulness, felt pressure and tension, and perceived choice while performing a given activity. The IMI measurement device has been used in several experiments related to intrinsic motivation and self-regulation (e.g., Ryan, 1982; Ryan, Mims & Koestner, 1983; Plant & Ryan, 1985; Ryan, Connell, & Plant, 1990; Ryan, Koestner & Deci, 1991; Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, & Leone, 1994). With this IMI measurement, we will be able to see if there is a direct relationship between participants’ intrinsic motivation and the improvement of their skills.

Results

The results discussed here are only being reported for the students participating in swim lessons offered by Campus Recreation. There was a total of 13 students (8 female, 2 males, average age of 24.4 years) across 2 sessions who agreed to participate in the research.  The pre-test was conducted before any instruction from the certified water safety instructor, and the post-test was conducted on the last day of their 8-lesson package where each lesson was 45-minutes. Table 1 shows the results, from Session 1, while Table 2 shows results from Session 2. There was an improvement in Aquaticity skills based on the 6 tasks that were evaluated.

Table 1. Results from Session 1, Campus Recreation Swim Lessons

Table 2. Results from Session 2, Campus Recreation Swim Lessons

Analysis

Analyzing session one (Table 1), the two skills with the most improvement were floating and the 25-yard swim. The freestyle stroke and floating positions are a portion of the main topics within the swim lesson curriculum for this specific program. With the expertise and guidance of the instructor, the participants were able to improve from a lower-half rating in these two tasks to an upper-half rating. When analyzing session two (Table 2), the two skills with the most improvement were floating and gliding. Floating in this session had the greatest difference between the six pre- and post-skills tests with an improvement of 3 points in session two and a 1.3 points improvement in session one.

A factor of this result could be that it was based on a new set of participants in session two rather than in session one where their skills in the pre-test were lower and could show a greater difference in the post-test. Gliding shows better improvements because there were several participants that could not perform this skill during the pre-test, thus showing a substantial improvement from pre-test to post-test. While all six tasks that were performed showed improvement with the two sessions combined, floating (+2.37) and gliding (+2.04) showed the greatest overall improvement (Figure 1). The range of improvements for the other tasks was 0.50-0.96. All 13 participants personally improved in at least one task, and multiple participants went from not participating in a task (score of 0) to scoring mid-range to upper level after their eight swim lessons.

For the pre-test IMI, a Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for the relationship between participants pre-aquaticity skills averages and their perceived competence. A strong positive correlation was ( r (25) = .692, p < .001), indicating a significant linear relationship between the two variables. Specifically, the ESS majors students tend to have higher perceived competence starting an aquatics program.

For the post-test IMI, an independent-samples t-test comparing the IMI’s mean scores for the value of the ESS majors’ course and the swim lessons participants found a significant difference between the means of the two groups ( t (16) = -2.51, p <.05). The value mean of the ESS majors’ course was significantly lower ( M = 3.71, sd = .62) than the mean of the swim lesson participants ( M = 4.55, sd = .72). Generally, in any type of exercise or activity, higher interest and value scores tend to show positive correlations with the adherence to the activity (Ryan et al., 1991).

Discussion

What does this mean for entities that provide swim lessons? Measuring Aquaticity could be one method for assessing whether or not students are learning important life-saving swim skills and/or the quality of instruction. Information gained could be used to make necessary changes to their offerings such as expanding lesson packages if participants are not excelling at the right pace or having more in-depth training for swim instructors to ensure quality lesson offerings. Aquaticity can also be used to determine what level the participant should be placed in and if they are able to advance to the next level. There are certain variables to take into consideration as results can vary from one group of participants to another such as demographics and previous swim experience. In this study, the participants were college-aged and had little to no familiarity with the water. Participants with higher levels of water familiarity to start may show a smaller improvement from pre- to post-tests.

Limitations

Some limitations to make note of was having a limited sample of 13 participants total from the two sessions, which is partially due to the decrease in people pursuing swim lessons in the fall as compared to other times in the year. We are hopeful that the spring and summer classes will be full, or close to full, to be able to recruit more voluntary participants from the classes. Another limitation is that we chose the adult group swim lesson class, so the relative age was college-age students. We did not collect data from any private/one-on-one swim lessons or the youth group lessons, so results from these could potentially be different than our original sample. Lastly, we chose 6 of the 10 original tasks from the original Aquaticity study because the 6 chosen skills best suited the route for the aquatics demographics and participants we wanted to target.

Recommendations

Some recommendations to be made are having a team of 2-3 persons to collect the data from the pre- and post-tests. By doing so, testing each participant is easier because each data collector would be responsible for 2 or 3 tasks to test the participants and have them rotate to the next station of tasks. This allowed us to give the appropriate attention to the participants in the task and assign them the correct score for the task. Rotations also helped with the fluidity of the participant to go from one task to the next.

Another recommendation is to give the participants the results from the pre- and post-tests, so they can see the data from their swim lesson experience and hopefully sign up again to continue their improvements in the water. Lastly, there is the potential to offer a questionnaire to the participants to obtain information on their previous swim experience. Questions could ask why they signed up for lessons, have they taken lessons previously, and do their parents/guardians know how to swim. Adding a questionnaire could help identify factors which could potentially play a role in the participants’ pre and post-tests.

Conclusion

Future research will be conducted on the efficacy of Aquaticity in the coming spring and summer to hopefully expand the current data by using other populations instead of only adult group classes. Additionally, being able to see if the number of participants rises due to the season of the swim lessons being offered (fall participant numbers versus summer participant numbers). From the current data with the two sessions offered in the fall, there is evidence to suggest that this assessment tool is of value for adult swim lesson programs. Each participant improved in at least one of the six tasks, and there were improvements from the pre-test that was before any swim instruction to the post-test after participating in 8 swim lessons. The results are a step in the right direction for having an assessment tool which can be used by any type of entity providing swim lessons, or water safety training. Aquaticity could be the new future of assessing the skills of participants in aquatics programs.

References

Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. (1994).  Facilitating internalization:  The self-determination theory perspective.  Journal of Personality, 62 , 119-142.

Drowning. (2021). World Health Organization (WHO). Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drowning

Drowning Data. (2021). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Retrieved April 28, 20222, from https://www.cdc.gov/drowning/data

Drowning Statistics. (2021). Meow Meow Foundation. Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.meowmeowfoundation.org/drowning-statistics .

Facts & Stats About Drowning . (2018). Stop Drowning Now. Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.stopdrowningnow.org/drowning-statistics/ .

Plant, R. W., & Ryan, R. M.  (1985).  Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement:  An investigation of internally-controlling styles.  Journal of Personality, 53, 435-449

Private Swim Lessons . (2022). UT RecSports. Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.utrecsports.org/classes/private-swim-lessons

Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450-461.

Ryan, R. M., Connell, J. P., & Plant, R. W. (1990). Emotions in non-directed text learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 2, 1-17.

Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Varied forms of persistence: When free-choice behavior is not intrinsically motivated. Motivation and Emotion, 15, 185-205.

Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 736-750.

Swim-Lessons . (2021, December 9). Department of Campus Recreation: Texas State University. Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.campusrecreation.txstate.edu/Aquatics-and-Safety/Swim-Lessons.html

Texas A&M University Recreational Sports. (n.d.). Aquatics – Texas A&M Rec Sports . https://recsports.tamu.edu/programs/aquatics/

Varveri, D., Flouris, A. D., Smirnios, N., Pollatou, E., Karatzaferi, C., & Sakkas, G. K. (2016). Developing and testing an instrument to assess aquaticity in humans. Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, 20(3), 497–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.12.013 .

Youth Swim Lessons . (2022, January 6). Texas Tech University. Retrieved April 28, 2022, from https://www.depts.ttu.edu/urec/events/youthswimlessons.php

E. Weeks is a Senior Coordinator, Facility Operations at the University of Kansas, Recreation Services. J Zimmermann is an associate professor and academic specialist in the Recreation Studies program at Texas State University within the Department of Health and Human Performance. S Bender is a Senior Lecturer and Program Coordinator in the Exercise and Sports Science (ESS) and Physical Fitness and Wellness (PFW) Program at Texas State University.

More About the Authors:

Jo An M. Zimmermann , PhD, CPRP , is an associate professor and academic specialist in the Recreation Studies program at Texas State University within the Department of Health and Human Performance. Zimmermann teaches undergraduate and graduate courses related to administration, finance, and planning. Prior to coming to Texas State University, she was a senior lecturer in recreation management at Victoria University in Melbourne, Australia, as well as a visiting assistant professor in recreation administration at Clemson University, where she earned her Ph.D.

As a practitioner, Zimmermann worked as a recreation manager for the Park District of Oak Park and a recreation supervisor for the Park District of Morton Grove, both in Illinois. She has presented and written on management and administrative roles in parks and recreation, including authoring chapters in several textbooks. Zimmermann is a visiting professor at Beijing Sport University in Beijing, China, and has led students on study abroad experiences in Australia and New Zealand. She is a co-chair of the Leisure Management Special Interest Group (SIG) for the World Leisure Organization.

Stacey H. Bender , Ed.D ., is a Senior Lecturer and Program Coordinator in the Exercise and Sports Science (ESS) and Physical Fitness and Wellness (PFW) Program at Texas State University.  She teaches courses across both the ESS and PFW programs and specializes in aquatic therapy and social and behavioral sciences in physical fitness and wellness.  Her research interests include aquaticity and other aquatic research, postpartum behaviors and physical fitness, and other behavioral, social, and physical issues faced by mothers.

Emily Weeks

Emily grew up in a small town just outside of the Quad Cities on the Illinois side. She received a Bachelor of Arts in International Business at Augustana College while being able to play basketball for three years and work in the Campus Recreation department. With her love and passion for Campus Recreation, she decided to change her path of learning and pursue a Masters of Science in Recreation and Leisure Management. Her background in Aquatics started when she was 16 becoming a lifeguard at her local YMCA, and eventually, growing into supervisory positions at City Parks and Recreation entities. These positions helped her move forward in her career to become a Graduate Assistant of Aquatics and Safety at Texas State University Department of Campus Recreation where she managed a staff of lifeguards, water safety instructors, and lifeguard instructors. Emily is now Senior Coordinator, Facility Operations at the University of Kansas, Recreation Services.