A National Survey on Pre-Service Teachers’ Stress-Management and Well-Being Needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite substantial evidence of teachers’ challenges with stress and well-being, there is a lack of stress-management or well-being enhancement training at the pre-service level. The present study sought to examine the specific needs of pre-service teachers in the area of stress-management and well-being in an effort to inform the development of programs to address these needs. A total of 307 pre-service teachers in their final year from 12 universities across Canada participated in the online needs assessment survey. Students were asked questions related to their anticipated stressors for the teaching profession, their preferred training in the area of stress-management and well-being, as well as their preferred method of delivery for this training. Commonly anticipated stressors included their own expectations regarding their performance as a teacher, workload, and feeling responsible for students’ success. Overall, 93% of pre-service teachers rated the need for stress-management training as important. Similarly, a majority indicated that training around self-care (86%) and emotion regulation (84%) would be important components of teacher preparation and 50% indicated that this training should be delivered as a mandatory course within any pre-service curriculum. These findings will be used to develop a skills-based stress-management and well-being program for pre-service teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".