I saw in the news last week that legislation is getting passed to change the management structure of the Red Cross. I actually have nothing to say about any of that. I know there's been lots of criticism of the Red Cross, and maybe some of it is deserved, but generally speaking I tend to think the American Red Cross is a perfectly fine organization.
Except when it comes to the health and safety aspect, the swimming program in particular. In that respect I have a lot to complain about, and now that I'm going to have to fill out report cards for my students next week my frustrations are bubbling to the fore.
When I was a kid of swim lesson age (say between 1980-91) the Red Cross swimming lessons were structured as "Beginner," "Advanced Beginner," "Intermediate," "Swimmer," and "Advanced Swimmer." These were serviceable levels, except at the lower end when there would be a big bottleneck because the requirements to pass Beginner were a little too steep. For example, I remember having to swim 10 yards or so with the crawl stroke, without stopping, to pass, which took me at least three different 3-week classes to manage. These steep requirements meant that in a Beginner class you would have kids who could get their heads wet, prone float, and do a rudimentary crawl stroke mixed in with kids who might not even be willing to put their faces in the water. That's an enormous range of abilities. But apart from this problem with the Beginner requirements the rest of the curriculum generally made sense, as new skills were added later on (e.g., elementary backstroke in Advanced Beginner and sidestroke in Intermediate) but not before previous ones were reasonably mastered.
In the early 90s the Red Cross redid the entire curriculum, doing away with those class tiers and replacing them with Levels I through VI (give or take, as I think the numbers may have shifted over the years). What was good about this change was that now Level I was truly a beginner class for all the basic water acclimation skills kids needed to have before they could even begin to learn proper strokes. So by Level II in theory you'd have kids who were now really ready to learn to swim. Except that's not the way it's actually worked out. Given the almost negligible passing requirements of Level I, in Level II you still get kids that aren't necessarily ready to swim, but it turns out they aren't really expected to anyway because the requirements for passing Level II are also very low. Which means the bottleneck has simply moved to Level III, which requires decent mastery of the crawl stroke - a very difficult stroke to master - as well as the beginnings of all sorts of other strokes, including the butterfly(!)
All of this is completely unrealistic. For one, even if you were to decide that the crawl stroke should not be put together until Level III, which is awfully late, neither of the preceding two levels effectively require mastery of any of the basic skills that go into it. Meanwhile, Level III just has way too much to cover. As it is you could fill an entire 8-10 session course with instruction in the crawl stroke alone. First you have to ensure that the students can do a good prone float that keeps them on top of the water (some kids end up submerged, which will prevent the arm strokes from being successful). Then you have to make sure that they can kick with straight enough legs to not affect their buoyancy. Then you have to make sure that when they do their arm strokes they are able to generate enough momentum (as well as perform out-of-the-water recovery). With all that, then you can add the side breathing, for which you will need to have done drills on breath control so that they'll have any hope of being able to coordinate the timing. Which itself is hard to master, as is proper positioning of the head and proper form of the arms and legs. But because none of the earlier levels even require more than exposure to these elemental skills, they're forced to work on them all, plus the skill on the whole, in Level III. Where they also must now learn all sorts of new strokes (e.g., back crawl, elementary backstroke, butterfly). Unfortunately there simply isn't time to cover all of it. (There's barely enough time to teach all these things, let alone give the kids time to practice them). Now, if you're at a facility where you'll see a kid over the course of the summer, you might be able to cover everything eventually. But kids come and go and change instructors, classmates, and facilities. The courses have to be standard enough so that the levels will all be taught the same wherever they go. And I don't think they can be, at least not if the teaching is going to be effective.
Furthermore, there was another significant change in the 1990s that was also ill-advised, and that is the shift away from water survival skills to competitive swimming skills. For instance, back crawl is taught before elementary backstroke. And while the flutter kick that goes with the back crawl is potentially easier to do than the whip kick, the arm strokes for the back crawl are pretty difficult for little people to do well. Plus, like any stroke involving out-of-the-water arm recovery, it burns up much more energy than one (like elementary backstroke) where the arms can stay under the surface. But instead of these more efficient strokes, kids are now sooner taught the skills they need to be on a swim team. But wouldn't the swim team itself be in a better position to teach them? Not every kid goes on to swim competitively, and those that don't will need survival strokes more than they'll need competitive strokes. Unfortunately their aquatic education is now co-opted by these other students, even though by virtue of being on the swim team they will have an opportunity then to learn what they'll need to know for it.
Which is not to say that I think it's a good thing no one taught me the butterfly under the original Red Cross curriculum. On retrospect I would have gladly done away with some of the former Swimmer and Advanced Swimmer strokes like the trudgeon, and even perhaps the inverted breaststroke, and instead have learned the butterfly. But there's no reason the butterfly should be taught anywhere before Level IV, preferably Level V, and certainly not before the basic crawl stroke, breaststroke, sidestroke, elementary backstroke and even regular back crawl have been learned to the point that only more practice is needed for any remaining issues of form to be corrected. Students may not be able to go blazingly fast with all of them, but they should be able to go pretty far.
Perhaps the thinking is that because kids don't always progress through the entire Red Cross curriculum, it's better to frontload lots of skills while they're still around so at least if next summer they don't come back they'll have learned lots of basics. But I think the way the curriculum is set up it undermines that goal because it causes too much time to be wasted. For instance Level II, as it's currently constructed, is a waste of time. And Level III has too much in it, so advanced students have to waste their time waiting for their classmates to catch up. It puts instructors in a terrible position, because we may have kids ready for the new strokes, but we can't get there because other kids in the class are still trying to get the basic pieces of the front crawl down.
What's at least good about the Red Cross is that it does reassess the curriculum from time to time and make changes to it. My point is that it needs to do so in response to these issues, and below the fold I articulate specifically how the current level requirements need to be changed. What with 15+ years or so of experience teaching actual kids, and having had a valid Water Safety Instructor certificate since 1991, I think I know what I'm talking about.
Level I:
Water entry and exit. Currently requires only entering via stairs or ladder. Jumping in should be added as a requirement, as the willingness to do so is a big part of water acclimation. If kids are too tentative they'll struggle in later levels when they may find themselves having to swim independently and in water that may be deeper than they're comfortable.
Breath control and underwater swimming. Currently requires only faces to be put in water. The requirement should be for them to submerge their entire heads, as if they aren't ready to do that they won't be ready to swim on their own.
Buoyancy on front. Currently requires kids to "float" while supported and with their faces out of the water. This is not floating! First of all, a supported "float" with the head lifted out of the water undermines any self-buoyancy. Kids need to learn a proper prone position, with their heads tucked and faces fully submerged, in order to be buoyant, and they need to be able to do it by themselves if they're going to learn any sort of stroke in a subsequent level. Otherwise this is a completely useless requirement.
Buoyancy on back. Currently requires kids to "float" while supported, which again is a useless requirement unless they can float on their own.
Changing direction and position. Under the current requirement it can be demonstrated while walking. This is not much of a requirement, because pretty much any kid willing to get in the water will be able to do it, but if they can't then of course they shouldn't pass.
Treading. The requirement currently requires them to demonstrate it with support, but this requirement should be done away with. It is way too early to learn this skill, and too easy for kids to think that doggie-paddling is ok. We need to get them ready to do proper strokes, which treading would undermine, and anyway there's no way they'd be ready at this point to learn it in any way that would be effective.
Swim on front. I suppose it's ok to allow demonstration of the flutterkick to be with a kickboard. It's also ok to teach basic arm stroke mechanics for the crawl stroke that they can demonstrate while standing or walking. But there's no point - and I think it's actually counter-productive - to expect arm strokes to be done while swimming at any point before proper prone floating has been achieved. And it's certainly too soon to try to put the arms and legs together. Again, requirements that encourage the doggie paddle are not constructive.
Swim on back. I also think it's ok to allow demonstration of the flutterkick on the back to be supported with the kickboard, but if they can't actually float unsupported on their backs there's no point in asking for any sort of arm or leg motion to be demonstrated while in that position.
In summary, a sensible Level I course should be designed to ensure that kids can submerge their heads at will, blow bubbles, and float on their front and backs. Exposure to flutterkicking and arm movements for the crawl stroke can also be included as part of the course, although the demonstration standards can be fairly minimal (e.g., they can bend their knees to some degree while kicking).
Level II
Water entry and exit. Jumping in is currently a requirement for Level II. If they haven't already done it in Level I, they definitely should be able to do it here.
Breath control and underwater swimming. The requirement currently calls for rhythmic bobbing by submerging whole head. I think they should be able to submerge their whole head in Level I, but it may be ok to wait for Level II to achieve rhythmic bobbing (which involves breath control). However, kids should also be required to demonstrate rhythmic breathing as proper side breathing, because if they can't do that they'll never be able to put it together with the arm strokes.
Buoyancy on front. Currently requires simply a prone glide and jellyfish float. At this point the front glide should be near the surface of the water and be able to sport a reasonably straight-leg kick.
Buoyancy on back. Currently requires starting and recovering from back glide. This is reasonable, but I'd also want to see the a reasonable flutter kick on the back as well.
Changing direction and position. Again, it's not much of a requirement as they'll have to demonstrate it during class drills. But if students are struggling with it, particularly with respect to leveling off, then it would be something to address and possibly not pass them on until they were more comfortable with it.
Treading. I still think this is too soon to be taught to be useful, but depending on the class it could be useful to explore as sort of a "fun day" bonus, time permitting.
Swim on front. The current requirement is very flexible, and minimal, on what students need to be doing with their arms and legs. At minimum there should be decent arm strokes with kicking, but I think that if side breathing is not also required, and the full stroke hasn't been demonstrated 5-10 yards, there's going to be too big a bottleneck in Level III. It's much better to teach the whole thing at this level.
Swim on back. Currently requires merely finning or skulling. Much as I hate teaching the back crawl so early, given the curriculum of Level III this is the time to have taught the arms for it and required the whole stroke, with the flutterkick, to be demonstrated 5-10 yards.
Swim on side. The current requirement is minimal, but it's a bad idea to get into it at all at this level. I suppose it's in the curriculum to help prepare for the sidestroke (or develop body roll?), but they're not ready to take it on and it will just throw a wrench into students' crawl stroke development.
In summary, Level II should be designed to teach kids the front and back crawls to the point that they are able to comfortably do both for 5-10 strokes without stopping. If they don't have these mechanics down, throwing on more strokes in the next level will not be successful.
Level III
Entry and exit. Currently requires jumping into deep water and diving. If teachers don't have to spend a ton of time working on the the basics of the crawl stroke, there could be time to teach diving.
Breath control and underwater swimming. If they've passed Level II with a decent crawl stroke they can do for 5-10 yards or so, they'll be ready to explore deep water in this class. Otherwise it will be dangerous to take them there as they will not be strong enough swimmers.
Buoyancy on front. The current requirement is for a prone glide with two different kicks for two body lengths. Also requires survival float. The survival float requirement is good, and if they already knew the crawl stroke it could be good to have taught the whip kick, but but the distance requirement is way too short.
Buoyancy on back. The current requirement is for demonstration of two different kicks for two body lengths, and being able to back float for at least 30 seconds. The back float for 30 seconds is a good deep water survival skill, so that's fine, and if the students already learned the back crawl in Level II then there would have been time to have taught the whip kick on their backs, but the distance requirement is also way too short.
Treading. Currently required for 30 seconds in deep water. NOW is the proper time to teach treading, but I might want to see it for more than 30 seconds. Kids at this stage tend to struggle with treading for a minute, but 45 seconds could be reasonable. It could be a stretch, but now that they'll be tempted to swim in deep water it's something we might want to be sure they can do.
Swim on front. Currently requires 15 yards of front crawl and 15 yards of butterfly kick. The front crawl requirement is sound, but there should be no butterfly! Instead we should be teaching breaststroke first, and we should be requiring the whole stroke, arms and legs, to be demonstrated to some degree.
Swim on back. Currently requires back crawl 15 yards. Maybe if we've taught the basics of the back crawl in Level II we could expect 15 yards of it now. But in this level the entire elementary back stroke should also have been taught. The arms are actually pretty easy to teach and learn, and even if they don't quite put it together with the kick perfectly, they should be able to demonstrate the full stroke 15 yards as well.
In summary, Level III should be about improving - but not learning! - the front and back crawl so that half-pool distances can be attained (usually what swimming facilities' deep water tests require) and the elementary backstroke and breaststroke should be taught, along with treading and diving. That's all there will be time for.
Level IV
Currently requires surface dives, underwater swimming, 1 minute of treading, and open turns, which is all reasonable. It also requires 25 yards of front crawl and 15 yards of breastroke, which also seem reasonable if students already learned the breaststroke previously and are simply improving it in this class. Unfortunately this level requires the entire butterfly stroke and only the kick to the sidestroke, which is a mistake. It should be the other way around.
I rarely teach the levels above IV so I offer no commentary on them, although in looking them over just now they generally seem reasonable, except for the delayed sidestroke instruction.
Comments (3)
Cathy,
What a relief to see a sensible critique of Levels 1-4! Has anyone else said these things in the past 10 years? Surely others have noticed the problems of what's expected in these levels.
To me, the game is to keep kids in swimming lessons as long as possible to teach as much as possible. The way to keep them is to show parents that what kids are learning is essential to their safety, and to make it fun for kids so they want to stay. Those are goals #1 and 2.
From there, we need to teach kids how the water works: it holds them up. If they're really skinny and it doesn't hold them up, fine. Teach them that they're okay on the bottom and that there's an easy way to reach the surface when they need to be there. Give them games to feel buoyancy. Teach them back float and how to move from here to there on their backs, so if they walk off into a hole at some lake, they now have all the tools (above) to come up, and swim to shallow water without losing it.
There's so much change needed in swimming lessons! We instructors and the instructional agencies are responsible for preventing drowning by thinking up what people need, making it appealing to come learn it, and teaching it well. It's far less work than what's currently being done, and more to the point. We could put an end to preventable drowning (the vast majority of it) for older kids and adults this way.
Once they can "swim" which is just being able to do the above (if they can do these things, they will automatically be able to do other water moves, because they're comfortable in water) THEN we can teach them fancy things like strokes!
Much is being done these days to correct the drowning problem. Hopefully we'll get it right soon. The answer is available.
Thanks for putting your thoughts out there.
M. Ellen (Melon) Dash
Transpersonal Swimming Institute, Sarasota, FL and Berkeley, CA
Posted by Melon Dash | May 14, 2007 4:44 AM
Posted on May 14, 2007 04:44
I read this on a whim when I was looking for red cross requirements so that I could write my report cards. As you may have guessed I am a red cross instructor. I was shocked to see that this "information" had been posted in May of 2007, when exactly was the last time you actually looked at the Red Cross requirements? Level 1 involves floates and glides, Level 2 is glides with kicks, and moving straight arms in circles, and finally rolling from front to back to front, Level 3 refines this until they can roll from their back onto their front do 4 arms and roll onto their back four times unassisted. Level 4 refines the '4 arms' until they can do 2 arms with no troubles in a nice smooth repatition and it starts them on back crawl. Next time check your sources before you post something; Red cross may have gone from 12 levels to 10 but there are still 10 levels.
Here is a reliable source for you to browse:
http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=000005&tid=003
L. Pakrul
Swim Instructor, Mississauga/Brampton Ontario (That's in Canada in case you didn't know.)
Posted by L. Pakrul | June 12, 2007 9:59 PM
Posted on June 12, 2007 21:59
The Canadian Red Cross and American Red Cross are two separate entities, with two separate programs. Next time check your sources before you post condescending comments on other people's blogs.
Posted by Cathy | June 12, 2007 10:36 PM
Posted on June 12, 2007 22:36