The Impact of Professional Development About Weight-Related Issues for Pre-Service Teachers: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many teachers do not have a working knowledge of body image or weight issues. This pilot project examined body image satisfaction and eating/weight-related behaviours before and after a professional in-service with physical education pre-service teachers (N = 16). At the three- month follow-up, measures were repeated and qualitative data (critical incidents and a focus group) about the impact on teaching practice was collected. Results showed no significant changes, however pre-service teachers indicated (a) attempting to lose weight or gain muscle (despite many being in a healthy weight range), and (b) having a biased approach to weight-related issues. Pre-service teachers, particularly those specializing in physical education, are not immune to cultural messages that perpetuate the thin ideal. Future evaluation with a larger sample that formally measures implicit and explicit weight-bias is needed. Providing professional development for pre-service teachers may promote more positive practice about body image, weight-bias, and weight/eating-related concerns in schools.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".