Nível da aquaticidade após diferentes intervenções em um programa de natação para crianças no estágio transitório

Abstract

Traditional swimming teaching is characterized by learning competitive strokes, crawl, backstroke, butterfly and breaststroke, with an emphasis on error correction. However, new approaches have emerged with the aim of opposing mechanistic and sometimes monotonous teaching for students. The Comprehensive Aquatic Method (CAM), for example, is a method tested among schoolchildren. Through it, it is possible to develop aquatic competence and stimulate Aquaticity from the acquisition of skills such as flotation, propulsion, visual and auditory guidance, slides, entering the water, among others. In this way, the evaluation of these skills using the CAM can be done through the Aquaticity Test. The lower the level of Aquaticity of the individual, the greater the risk when the subject is exposed to the aquatic environment. The objective of the research was to compare the Aquaticity level of inexperienced children submitted to two programs using CAM, but that teach different aquatic skills. The research is characterized as quantitative and experimental design. The sample consisted of children aged 8 and 9 years, of both sexes, with no previous swimming experience. Subjects were randomized into two groups: swimming group (SG) and general skills group (GSG). The intervention lasted 12 weeks with face-to-face sessions twice a week of approximately 60 minutes each. The instruments used were the Aquaticity Test, the Perceived Aquatic Competence Test and a tool to assess Stroke Efficiency. The volunteers were evaluated one week before the beginning of the intervention and one week after the last intervention session. The independent t-test and two-way ANOVA were used for analysis between groups. Our results showed that regardless of the intervention performed, the level of Aquaticity after a period of 12 weeks using the CAM (F=29.626, p<0.05, np²= 0.426). Regarding the test tasks, in both groups there was a positive improvement after the intervention (SG - F=31.636, p<0.001, np²=0.442; GSG – F=16.429, p<0.001, np²=0.291), indicating that the tasks were equally stimulated or that the Aquaticity Test may not be sensitive in the analysis of each skill separately. As for the perception of competence, it is observed from our results that it is not related to the level of Aquaticity (SG - r= 0.32, p=0.12; GSG - r=0.89, p<0.001). As for kinematic parameters, such as stroke length (F=0.422, p=0.534, np²=0.050) and speed in 25 meters (F=4.092, p=0.078, np²=0.338), a period of 12 weeks was insufficient to produce significant effects on students in the early stages of learning. We conclude that the Aquaticity Test is an instrument that can be used by professionals in the area to assess the aquatic skills of inexperienced children, and that it improves over time with an intervention using CAM regardless of the focus of the class.