Validity and reliability of an assessment instrument of track start in swimming




content validity, construct validity, sport of swim, types of starting, performance evaluation


Background and Study Aim. The development and validation of assessment instruments are essential procedures for any professional intervention, including in physical education and sports contexts. This study aimed to provide a component-based assessment instrument for track start in swimming. It refers to the act of starting the competitive swim by diving into the water from a raised block (platform) at the edge of the pool. Material and Methods. The content validity involved the participation of sixty-three experienced swimming coaches. They completed a questionnaire about their degree of agreement (Likert scale) with the initial position, impulsion, flight, and entry into the water as the track start's components. Reliability and construct validity involved the participation of seven experienced swimming coaches. The first was verified through test-retest (intrarater) and reproducibility (interrater) procedures. The latter was tested by considering the instrument's ability to assess different track start performances. Results. The concordant answers (strongly agree and agree) ranged from 63% to 95%, with most components above 80%. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) results show from good to excellent interrater and intrarater reliabilities. Specifically, the interrater correlations in the test and intrarater correlations in track start 1 were revealed excellent. In addition, the interrater correlations in the retest and intrarater correlations in track start 2 were revealed good. Conclusions. The obtained validities and reliabilities made possible a component-based assessment instrument that allows: (i) a clear and standardized structure of track start in swimming involving the initial position, impulsion, flight, and entry into the water; (ii) accessing to the practitioners’ states in relation to desired start performance; and (iii) a reference for coaches and teachers to provide instruction and feedback for learning and performance improvement.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Fabrício Madureira, Universidade Metropolitana de Santos; Universidade Metropolitana de Santos, Santos, Brazil.

Thábata V.B. Gomes, Universidade Federal de Pelotas; Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.

Thiago A.C. Oliveira, Universidade Paulista; Universidade Paulista, Jundiaí, Brazil.

Andrea M. Freudenheim, Universidade de São Paulo; Escola de Educação Física e Esporte, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.

Umberto C. Corrêa, Universidade de São Paulo; Escola de Educação Física e Esporte, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.


Burkett B, Mellifont R, Mason B. The influence of swimming start components for selected Olympic and Paralympic swimmers. J ApBiomech, 2010; 26:134–141. https://doi. org/10. 1123/jab. 26. 2. 134

Veiga S, Cala A, Frutos PG, Navarro E. Comparison of starts and turns of national and regional level swimmers by individualized-distance measurements. Sport Biomech, 2014; 13:285–295. https://doi. org/10. 1080/14763141. 2014. 910265

Cossor J, Mason B. Swim start performances at the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. In: ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive; 2001.

Đurović M, Stojanović N, Stojiljković N, Karaula D, Okičić T. The effects of post-activation performance enhancement and different warm-up protocols on swim start performance. SciReports, 2022; 12(1):1–11. https://doi. org/10. 1038/s41598-022-13003-9

Maglischo EW. Nadando o mais rápido possível [Swimming as fast as possible]. 3ed. Barueri, SP: Manole; 2010. (In Portuguese).

Blanksby B, Nicholson L, Elliott B. Bechanical analysis of the grab, track and handle swimming starts: an intervention study. Sports Biomech, 2002; 1(1):11–24. https://doi. org/10. 1080/14763140208522784

Breed RV, Young WB. The effect of a resistance training programme on the grab, track and swing starts in swimming. J Sports Sci, 2003; 21(3):213–220. https://doi. org/10. 1080/0264041031000071047

Matúš I, Ružbarský P, Vadašová B. Key Parameters Affecting. Kick Start Performance in Competitive Swimming. Int J Env Res Public Health, 2021; 18:2–11. https://doi. org/10. 3390/ijerph182211909

Welcher RL, Hinrichs RN, George TR. Front-or rear-weighted track start or grab start: Which is the best for female swimmers? Sports Biomech, 2008; 7(1):100–113. https://doi. org/10. 1080/14763140701683247

Bingul B. Bulgan C. Aydin M. The kinematic analysis of the grab, rear track, and front track start in swimming. Sport Mont. 2015; 13:57–62.

Fischer S, Kibele A. The biomechanical structure of swim start performance. Sports Biomech, 2016; 15:397–408. https://doi. org/10. 1080/14763141. 2016. 1171893

Galbraith H, Scurr J, Hencken C, WoodL, Graham-Smith P. Biomechanical comparison of the track start and the modified one-handed track start in competitive swimming: an intervention study. J App Biomech, 2008; 24:307–315. https://doi. org/10. 1123/jab. 24. 4. 307

Issurin V, Verbitsky O. Track start vs. grab start: evidence of the Sydney Olympic Games. Biomech Med Swimming, 2003; 9(9):213–218.

Slawson SE, Conway PP, Cossor J, Chakravorti N. West AA. The categorization of swimming start performance with reference to force generation on the main block and footrest components of the Omega OSB11 start blocks. J Sport Sci, 2013; 31(5):468–478. https://doi. org/10. 1080/02640414. 2012. 736631

Takeda T, Sakai S, Takagi H, Okuno K, Tsubakimoto S. Contribution of hand and foot force to take-off velocity for the kick-start in competitive swimming. J Sport Sci, 2017; 35:565–571. https://doi. org/10. 1080/02640414. 2016. 1180417

Qiu X, Veiga S, Lorenzo A, Kibele A, Navarro E. Differences in the key parameters of the individual versus relay swimming starts. Sports Biomechanics, 2021; 1–13. https://doi. org/10. 1080/14763141. 2021. 1878262

Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 1971;76(5): 378–382. https://doi. org/10. 1037/h0031619

Jesus K, Mourão L, Roesler H, Viriato N, Jesus K, Vaz M, . . . Vilas-Boas JP. 3D device for forces in swimming starts and turns. App Sci, 2019; 9(17):3559.

https://doi. org/10. 3390/app9173559

Rudnik D, Rejman M, Machado L, Fernandes RJ, Vilas-Boas JP. Does the back plate position influence swimming start temporal characteristics? Int J Env Res Public Health, 2022; 19(5):2722. https://doi. org/10. 3390/ijerph19052722

Thanopoulos V, Rozi G, Okičić T, Dopsaj M, Jorgić B, Madić D. . . . Batis E. Differences in the efficiency between the grab and track starts for both genders in Greek young swimmers. J Hum Kinetics, 2012; 32:43–51. https://doi. org/10. 2478/v10078-012-0022-8

Gonjo T, Olstad BH. Race analysis in competitive swimming: A narrative review. Int J Env Res Public Health, 2021; 18(1): 69. https://doi. org/10. 3390/ijerph18010069

Madureira F, Bastos FH, Corrêa UC, Rogel T, Freudenheim AM. Assessment of beginners' front-crawl stroke efficiency. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2012; 115(1):300–308. https://doi. org/10. 2466/06. 05. 25. PMS. 115. 4. 300-308

Monteiro GN, Ribas S, Jiménez FJ, Mazzardo T, Araújo ND, Aburachid LMC. Development process of content validity of pedagogical knowledge assessment in swimming. RevBrasCinDesemp Hum, 2020; 22. https://doi. org/10. 1590/1980-0037. 2020v22e72071

Erbaugh SJ. Assessment of swimming performance of preschool children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1978; 46(3_suppl2):1179–1182. https://doi. org/10. 2466/pms. 1978. 46. 3f. 1179

Valentini NC, Pereira KRG, Nobre GC. Content, construct, and criterion validity, reliability, and objectivity for aquatic readiness assessment for Brazilian children. Int J Aquatic Res Edu, 2022; 13(4). https://doi. org/10. 25035/ijare. 13. 04. 11

Morgado LD, De Martelaer K, D'Hondt E, Barnett LM, Costa AM, Howells K. . . . Jidovtseff B. Pictorial scale of perceived water competence (PSPWC) testing manual (pp. 1–26). University of Liege; 2020.

Banville D, Rikard L. Observational tools for teacher reflection. J Phys Edu Recr Dance, 2001; 72(4):46–49. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07303084. 2001. 10605739

Langendorfer SJ, Bruya R. Aquatic readiness: developing water competence in young children. Human Kinetics; 1995.

Lepore M, Columna L, Lizner LF. Assessments and activities for teaching swimming. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2015.

Rink JE. Teaching physical education for learning. McGraw-Hill; 2020.

Thomas JR, Martin P, Etnier J, SilvermanSJ. Research methods in physical activity. Champaign, IL: Human kinetics; 2022.

Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. NY: Wiley; 1981.

Bartko JJ. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psych Reports, 1966; 19(1):3–11. https://doi. org/10. 2466/pr0. 1966. 19. 1. 3

McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psych Methods, 1996; 1(1):30. https://doi. org/10. 1037/1082-989X. 1. 1. 30

Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psych Bulletin, 1979; 86:420–3428. https://doi. org/10. 1037//0033-2909. 86. 2. 420

Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res, 2005; 19(1):231–240. https://doi. org/10. 1519/00124278-200502000-00038

Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropractic Med, 2016; 15(2):155–163. https://doi. org/10. 1016/j. jcm. 2016. 02. 012

Haynes SN, Richard DCS, Kubany ES. Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psych Assessment, 1995; 7(3):238–247. https://doi. org/10. 1037/1040-3590. 7. 3. 238

Maguire T, Hattie J, Haig B. Construct validity and achievement assessment. Alberta J Edu Res, 1994; 40(2):09–126.

Oslin JL, Mitchell SA, Griffin LL. The game performance assessment instrument (GPAI): Development and preliminary validation. J Teaching Phys Edu, 1998; 17(2):231–243. https://doi. org/10. 1123/jtpe. 17. 2. 231

Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE. Construct validity in psychological tests. PsychBulletin, 1955; 52(4):281–302. https://doi. org/10. 1037/h0040957

Sullivan GM. A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Edu, 2011; 3(2):119–120. https://doi. org/10. 4300/JGME-D-11-00075. 1

Kapus J, Stibilj J, Košmrlj K, Virag J. Development and validity of the front crawl technique assessment tool: a pilot study. KinesiologiaSlovenica, 2022; 28(2):5–19. https://doi. org/10. 52165/kinsi. 28. 2. 5-19

Kubayi A, Coopoo Y, Toriola A. Knowledge transfer from sport science to coaching: A South African coach’s perspective. South Afr J Res Sport, Phy Edu Recr, 2019; 41(1):51–61.

Roberts AH, Greenwood DA, Stanley M, Humberstone C, Iredale F, Raynor A. Coach knowledge in talent identification: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. J Sci Med Sport, 2019; 22(10):1163–1172. https://doi. org/10. 1016/j. jsams. 2019. 05. 008

Silva Filho AS, Silveira SR, Silva SL, Corrêa UC. Instructional Cues in Futsal Teaching, Coaching and Matches. Sportis. Sci Tech J Sch Sport, Phy Edu Psych, 2022; 8(2):210–226. https://doi. org/10. 17979/sportis. 2022. 8. 2. 9024

Page TJ, Iwata BA. Interobserver Agreement. In: Poling A, Fuqua RW (eds. ) Research Methods in Applied Behavior Analysis, Boston, MA: Springer US; 1986. p. 99–126. https://doi. org/10. 1007/978-1-4684-8786-2_6




How to Cite

Madureira F, Gomes TV, Oliveira TA, Freudenheim AM, Corrêa UC. Validity and reliability of an assessment instrument of track start in swimming. Pedagogy of Physical Culture and Sports. 2023;27(1):45-53.

Abstract views: 90 / PDF downloads: 58