Assessment of Beginners' Front-Crawl Stroke Efficiency

Abstract

Efficiency in front-crawl stroke has been inferred primarily by means of the analysis of arm actions, specifically, stroke frequency and stroke length. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether swimming efficiency could be better assessed in children still learning the front-crawl stroke by analyzing the movement pattern as a whole. Forty-two children enrolled in private swimming programs volunteered to participate in the study. The task consisted of swimming 30 m as fast as possible. Three experts analyzed the movement pattern of the participants using a checklist. Both stroke frequency and stroke length were calculated. The correlation coefficients between the time taken to swim and both the stroke frequency and stroke length were not significant, but the total and components of the checklist scores were. Results indicate that the swimming efficiency of children learning the front-crawl stroke can be better assessed by analyzing their whole movement pattern.

The Effects of Regular Classes and Classes With Additional Exercises on Students’ Motor Abilities

“…The results of previous studies show that the main factors for evaluating the efficacy of swimmers are unsuitable for students who are still learning to swim and that they differ considerably from one another in terms of motor skills (Formosa, Mason, & Burkett, 2011;Madureira, Bastos, Corrêa, Rogel, & Freudenheim, 2012). Similar results were obtained by individuals studying the effects of additional hours of physical activity on the improvement of motor skills of students (Boyle-Holmes et al, 2010;Matvienko & Ahrabi Fard, 2010;Ericsson, 2011).…”

Inter- and intra-rater reliability of swimming teachers with different skill levels, in different conditions, evaluating front crawl arm movement in non-expert swimmers

“…Some movements are difficult to observe, either by the turbulence generated in the water or by the teacher's positioning (on the ledge or inside the water). For this reason, the teacher can evaluate these items by the consequence of movement and not by movement itself 1,22 , with marked difference according to the evaluator's experience 8 . Nevertheless, despite the notion that a swimmer who presents a good quality of movement along with good performance must have a superior technique 1,8 , sports performance is dependent on several variables 15,23 .…”

“…Also, the focus of technical observation was on the right arm stroke and its associated movements. However, the overall movement of the swimming also depends on the action of the other upper and lower limbs 15,22 .…”

“…However, the analysis involves the correct understanding of (i) the end of this phase, (ii) the hand speed, and (iii) whether the elbow extension is appropriate. Thus, great movements can be confused with their performance consequence (displacement efficiency) 1,10,22 . Item 19 becomes complex because it subjectively involves a kinematic and temporal analysis.…”

The intermediate learner’s choice of self-as-a-model strategies and the eight-session practice in learning of the front crawl swim

“…The performance of the front crawl was assessed using a checklist for qualitative assessment of the front crawl (Madureira, et al, 2012). This checklist involves scores related to a category of 12 errors of performance: (1) attack and recovery; (2) release; (3) synchronisation of the upper limbs; (4) respiration; (5) synchronisation between the upper limbs and respiration; (6) scan down; (7) scan inside; (8) upward sweep; (9) body positioning; (10) the lower limbs; (11) synchronisation between the lower limbs and breath; and (12) synchronisation between the lower and upper limbs.…”