Claims

Assessment instruments in school swimming research focus on technical execution, with few tools aligned to functional aquatic competence

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Most measurement tools in the reviewed studies targeted technical execution and swimming strokes, omitting dimensions such as risk management and environmental adaptability. → Trinidad Alfonso 2026

Evidence

Trinidad Alfonso 2026

Trinidad Alfonso, Mendoza-Castejón Daniel, Mercedes de la Calle Laura, del-Blanco-Muñiz José Ángel. (2026). Analysis of swimming teaching programs, aquatic competencies and specific skills in school settings from early childhood to secondary education: A systematic review. PLOS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353477

q2 · i? · review · r2

Instrument analysis across the 16 included studies. The review reports that "most of the tools identified focused on technical execution and swimming strokes", limiting comprehensive assessment of aquatic literacy. Only five studies used standard pictorial dimensional scales of aquatic competence.

"most of the tools identified focused on technical execution and swimming strokes, with fewer instruments aligned with functional aquatic competence, which limited the comprehensive assessment of aquatic literacy by omitting critical dimensions such as risk management and adaptability to the environment."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.