Mandatory swim instruction . . . effective, fair?

And what about fearful students, those with no aquatic experience and who are often studious or unathletic? I haven't the faintest idea whether or not mandatory swim lessons for people who have reached adolescence without learning to swim are effective in teaching skills or reducing drowning. But your suggestion that "fearful" students are "often studious" really bugs me. I am quite sure that young adults who are afraid of the water are not any more likely to be "studious" than their peers who like to swim. I also suspect that they are not any less likely to be athletic, either.

I haven't the faintest idea whether or not mandatory swim lessons for people who have reached adolescence without learning to swim are effective in teaching skills or reducing drowning. But your suggestion that "fearful" students are "often studious" really bugs me. I am quite sure that young adults who are afraid of the water are not any more likely to be "studious" than their peers who like to swim. I also suspect that they are not any less likely to be athletic, either. And, conversely, I doubt that students who do like to swim are any less likely to be "studious." That sounds like the jock/nerd stereotypes.

Of course you are right that being studious or nonathletic has no necessary correlation with being aquaphobic. And students who don't want to meet the swim requirement don't have to enroll there. Presumably they were aware of the requirement when they started there. Attendance at any institution of higher learning is voluntary. Also, students who have to enroll in swimming class do learn a vital skill they otherwise might never learn. No question. But, for adults, I wonder if learning to swim should always be voluntary. In high school, where attendance is essentially mandatory, swimming is often required in PE classes in order to graduate. But these are adolescents, who presumably have not the maturity to judge what is best for them. Also, in college or elsewhere, how well does someone learn something as hard as swimming is, under duress, and in a limited time? For some, facing that situation is an agonizing dilemma. Do they grin and bear it, forcing themselves through as best they can, or should they do it only out of a real desire to learn? How well can they learn under those circumstances? But most can learn if required, I suppose. But, then, it is good thing if a person is made to face his fears, often leading to a positive outcome in other ways. But most colleges have dropped their swimming requirement, perhaps because so many students were trying to dodge it. Many nonswimming students arriving in college have real anxiety about swimming , as do most nonswimming adults. It is generally recognized that most individuals have learned to swim before they reach adulthood. Do mandatory swim classes really work? How well do they work? Do they produce people who can swim with ease and cconfidence, or do they produce people who have half-learned the skill, to the satisfaction of their instructors, perhaps, but are not really competent or safe in the water. I am not sure of the answers to these questions.

... It is generally recognized that most individuals have learned to swim before they reach adulthood. ... Recognized by whom? And please define "learned to swim". There are a great many people that fear even blowing bubbles in their own hands, and fewer still who can propel themselves 25 yards without stopping.

...Do mandatory swim classes really work? How well do they work? Do they produce people who can swim with ease and cconfidence, or do they produce people who have half-learned the skill, to the satisfaction of their instructors, perhaps, but are not really competent or safe in the water... Looking around the city-owned pools during lap swimming times, I don't see very many people at all who swim with ease - and that's in people who have presumably learned enough to voluntarily choose to swim laps. I went through several years of childhood swim lessons and ended up as a clumsy, thrashing, 38 strokes per length type of swimmer. This is partly because of flaws in the teaching methods, and partly because human beings simply don't move well in water - we are designed for running long distances. Still, I don't feel those early lessons were a waste of time. All of my siblings do some sort of aquatic activity (canoing, SCUBA diving, snorkeling) with confidence because, even though they don't share my passion for swimming, they've learned enough to swim to shore if they ever fell out of a boat, and they don't feel panicky in deep water. As the shoe ad says... just do it!

I believe that Melon Dash, founder of the Miracle Swimming Institute and creator of a revolutionary new method of instruction for fearful nonswimmers, defined it best in her book, Conquer Your Fear of Water (AuthorHouse, 2006). She maintains that swimming is not merely learning mechanics but being in control. Swimming, she says, is not learning strokes even done with fear, nor is it getting from point to point in the water while being unable stop in the middle. It is, rather, learning to be in control, to not panic in water, shallow or deep. That is what I mean by saying that the definition of swimming is to be or move in water, especially deep water, with confidence and ease. That is the essential ingredient one must have before learning swimming mechanics. If you don't have that, you cannot learn to swim. If you do you have it, you cannot fail to learn, she says. According to polling data, 46 percent of adult Americans are afraid of deep water in pools, 64 percent are afraid of deep open water, and 39 per cent are afraid to put their heads under water. Recently, it has been reported that many people overestimate their actual swimming ability. They think they are safer than they really are. Since many or most adults have had swimming instruction in the past, I feel there is something clearly wrong with our method of swimming instruction. Those people who already have a sense of control in water learn to swim. Those who don't have it won't. The object of swimming instruction should be to prevent panic in all situations. I do not believe mandatory swimming classes necessarily teach this. Millions of adults say they've had swimming instruction but are still afraid of water. Please check out the websites I have cited in my initial posting if you have not already done so and see if the adult swimming students you see can swim by the definition I have given above. You can get through a forced learning situation like that, believe that you have acquired basic swimming skills needed to pass a test, and yet know deep down that you are not safe in the water. Can a student, for example, who has never been near the water before, get through a swim class, receive a passing grade, never gets in the water again, does not learn to like swimming, and thus never reinforces the skills he has learned, be considered water-safe? When you think about it, all this makes a lot of sense. It seems to me to be intuitively true. I also think that more must be done to prevent the approximately 3500 drowning deaths and the 20,000 to 30,000 incidents of near-drowning that occur each year in the US, most of which are preventable. That even more such incidents do not occur could be because so many people are simply too afraid to get near the water, and so avoid being in it. Could doing what I have said above be a part of the solution? That is really the bottom line, so far as I am concerned. What do you think?

I believe that Melon Dash Melon Dash? Greatest name evar! I really like the idea of high schools and colleges making swim instruction mandatory, but it has to be done effectively. You can't just plunk a non-swimmer in the pool and tell them to start swimming! :drown:

My alma mater had this requirement for ages, for unknown reasons. I thought it was ridiculous. I think it was eliminated a few years back. I never undrestood the point of forcing someone to pass a swim test who couldn't swim or didn't want to. Given how bad we were at football my 4 years, they should have forced open tryouts for the student body, not swimming.

We don't require adult smokers to quit - which has far greater negative impact on society than non-swimming adults. So I suggest requiring adults to learn how to swim is not reasonable. It is far more important and valuable to expose children to swimming. We here know how valuable it is to be comfortable in the water later in life. Hard data was gathered recently by USA Swimming that showed a huge disparity in swimming experience between whites and non-whites. THAT is a problem and deserves attention.

...Can a student, for example, who has never been near the water before, get through a swim class, receive a passing grade, never gets in the water again, does not learn to like swimming, and thus never reinforces the skills he has learned, be considered water-safe?... Well, one thing is certain. They definitely aren't going to be water-safe if they have no swim training whatsoever. The Red Cross lessons I had as a kid didn't impart great technique for actual swimming, but there was a lot of water safety drilling included. For example, in one lesson we had to bring a change of clothes and an old pair of shoes, put them on over our swimsuits, jump into the pool, and practice taking them off in the water, as training for an accidental fall from a boat. In another we learned to tow each other to "shore" using assorted objects.Nothing to do with swimming per se, but useful things to keep in mind. As to "fair" - if the rules are the same for everyone, and everyone knows the rules up front, then it's fair.