swimming lessons

pukkamum

we took our son swimming from an early and i thought that as i am a very good swimmer i could teach him myself.
However, when in the pool with us he just sees it as play time and doesn't want to buckle down and learn strokes though he could get across the pool from an early age.
So i enrolled him in some intensive swiming lessons for a week and he made more progress in that week than he had in 7 years with me!!!!
So i would say get them confident in the water yourself but then think about lessons once they need to start on getting the technique right.

tanith

I have taught all 3 of my own kids and a few of my grands... of course they had school lessons too but mostly could swim already... they all swim very well... it was mostly done in fun and they became confident in playing in the water and the swimming came naturally... its perfectly possible to teach them yourself as long as you are confident too...
That said there is nothing wrong with lessons either apart from the cost...:rotfl:

bestpud

Surfbabe wrote: »

Start by getting their names on waiting list and taking them at least once a week for fun time so they are used to the water and are confident going under. Unless you are a competent swimmer who can swim properly then don't try to teach them yourself - it does cause all sorts of problems if they have been taught incorrectly!! ( I should now - I teach swimming for a living!)

The main thing is water confidence. Swimming is a life skill, a necessity not a luxury as webitha says above. I've seen several people drown and rescued a small child from drowning and it is not nice. So take the plunge an go for it !!!

Why is 'swimming' as you define it, a life skill?

I actually agree it is good for children to learn, if they want to. I just don't agree lessons are a good thing for all children. And I feel it is wrong to pressurise parents into paying for lessons with stories of drowning!

Why is it a necessity for parents to pay for swimming lessons?

Being able to swim may save their life one day but it depends on your definition of swimming tbh. It is far better to have a child who can 'swim' and is happy in the water than one who hates it because they couldn't get on with lessons.

As I said earlier, OP, give it a try (it's great it it works for them) but don't flog a dead horse if it doesn't work out - you will be doing them as big a favour by spending time in the water with them and getting them confident.

webitha

i pay for lessons cause i dont have the patience to teach mine even tho i am a strong swimmer.
i am lucky tho as my lot have taken to water like fish and i end up having to drag then out , but now the elder two are competent i can take them swimming in the hols by myself which i could never do before, that way ive always got an eye on the youngest who has a nasty habit of climbing out and launching herself back in :rotfl:
and that means now they all are water confident, roll on friday when we invade blackpool sandcastle :rotfl::rotfl::T

Surfbabe

bestpud wrote: »

Why is 'swimming' as you define it, a life skill? You learn coordination, discipline, breathing techniques to start with and there are lots of sports you can;t take part in unless you can swim

I actually agree it is good for children to learn, if they want to. I just don't agree lessons are a good thing for all children. No they aren;t but that is quite often down to negative thoughts from the parents and the fact they are never bought to the pool apart from their lessons.And I feel it is wrong to pressurise parents into paying for lessons with stories of drowning! I wasn;t intending to pressurise anyone into paying for lessons but like teaching your child to drive all sorts of bad habits creep in - and you have obviously never seen a child or adult drown because the rescuers couldn;t get to them in time and they didn;t know what do to.

Why is it a necessity for parents to pay for swimming lessons? It isn't if you feel you can do the job competently yourself - I would rather teach children that want to know how to swim properly (and we teach life saving skills from an early age) than children whose parents feel duty bound to drag them along week after week because they think they should.

Being able to swim may save their life one day but it depends on your definition of swimming tbh. It is far better to have a child who can 'swim' and is happy in the water than one who hates it because they couldn't get on with lessons. True it may save their life one day but I still manitain that it is better to know how to do it properly

As I said earlier, OP, give it a try (it's great it it works for them) but don't flog a dead horse if it doesn't work out - you will be doing them as big a favour by spending time in the water with them and getting them confident. which is what I said - water confidence is an absolute must from an early age.

See my answers to your statements above. Water confidence is a priority and IMO learning the correct techniques for a sport are essential. The week long crash courses in the summer holidays can be all it takes to improve strokes and skills.

Idiophreak

tbh I don't really see being able to swim as any more a life skill than being able to fly a plane these days...It's quite possible for people to go through life now without exposure to water of any kind if they want.

As for the OP, I'd fork out for a few lessons and see how they get on - if they like it more than swimming with you, keep paying, if not, teach them yourself.

iskc85860506

I agree swimming is a life skill but then we are all entitled to our opionions. However I dont think this is the point in question this person is asking wether swimming lessons are better or teaching the children themselves.

I have a ds 3 and dd 2 my son is due to start swimming lessons in 2 weeks and it runs 4 12 wks. we decided to get him into swimming asap as I felt than with all the water around (lakes, streems, ponds etc) I would rather he swam than sank oviously. Also I dont want to be on edge everytime he is somewhere that has the smallest amount of water.
We regualy go swimming as a family an I did consider teachin him myself bt the only sessions I can go to r the fun time ones so I am tryin to get him to swim while all the others are playing (abit unfair I feel).

However if the lessons dont go well and he is not enjoying it (although I will make him go 4 the 12 wks 1st as it can take a while for them to get used to new things, so he has to give it a fair chance) then I will reconsider my decision and may teach him myself.



And yes before someone says it I do have experiance of a child falling into a pond and its easily done (it takes a split second and can happen to anyone), it wasnt my own child and the child is fine. We were on hol looking around new surroundings and didnt relise there was a pond/lake as it was well covered/surrounded. Child fell in and sunk (4 adults there and 2 froze, u never no how u will react in these surcumstances) oviously others got child out safley.

jackomdj

My children are now 17 months & almost 4yrs. They have both had lessons since they were babies. An important element of their lessons is knowing how to get in & out of the water safely (eg slide in facing out of the pool, use the ladder etc) it is also getting them confident in the water & it also gives you (the parent) the confidence to do things with them, with my eldest I was always nervous about letting her turn & swim to me with no bands, with the youngest I am happy for her to do anything!

I remember when the youngest was about 14 months she pushed herself off the big float & into the water with no bands, I was worried but the teacher was just laughing, I got Katie out & she was giggling & so proud of herself & she did it a few more times!

One of the other safety things they learn is walking, not running round the pool. They also start to learn to do different things with their arms & legs to move through the water & go on their back's (lots of little ones don't like this)

Personally I would say to anyone to go to lessons, but also go family swimming.

Nicky

mrcow

My son (now 6) is a very good swimmer and my eldest daughter (3) is getting there. Neither have had lessons - we just take them swimming quite a lot so they get the practice in.

The advantages of swimming lessons I guess are:

1. You don't have to actually get in the water yourself (pain in the backside to get all your hair wet etc if you've got other things to do afterwards)

2. The structure of the lessons means that the child swims regularly as opposed to on an ad hoc basis when you can manage it

3. There is a structure so the child can progress (as opposed to just messing about in the water which is in essence what my children do lol even though they are still swimming).

It's probably worth it if you can afford it fine and fit the time in for them going each week.

Carmina_Piranha_3

My eldest did both, but he didn't start lessons until he was nearly 5, when his younger cousin started. He didn't enjoy the lessons much, he liked splashing, diving under etc. but didn't have the coordination or inclination to learn 'proper' strokes and techniques. He wasn't 'passing' the exams, and was in the same class forever bless him. He picked things up during family swimming sessions anyhow, especially at water parks.

It depends on the child I suppose. My youngest just turned 3 and is desperate for the next course of lessons to start - although I don't know if he'll get a place. I take him swimming at least once a week, 3 times in the holidays when his other activities aren't on. We've stayed to watch a lesson through the window, to see if he still wants to join in. i thought it would be too structured for him but he still seems interested. he wants to go straight from gymnastics into a swimming lesson though and i know that will be a bad idea lol! i hope they do beginner's lessons on other days.

Your children may or may not like lessons - they might also be too tired for after-school lessons. If there are lessons on straight after a family session then staying to watch one (with a picnic, swimming makes children very hungry and grumpy!) might be a good idea.