Food attitudes in female athletes: association with menstrual cycle length

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between indicators of risk of disordered eating, body image and varied menstrual cycle lengths. Altogether, 151 female athletes were invited from 16 sports and 70 female non-athletic controls were recruited from a university lecture class. The participants completed several surveys, including demographics, menstrual cycle history, physical activity, Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI) and the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ). Selected EDI subscales were summed to reflect eating disorder risk and body image. Menstrual cyclicity was based on self-reported cycle length for the last 6 months (normal cycles = 26-32 days, irregular cycles < or =26 or >32 days). Athletes overall had more irregular cycles (29.1%) than the non-athletes (15.7%) (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in scores for eating disorder risk, body dissatisfaction, drive for thinness, cognitive restraint (TFEQ) and disinhibition (TFEQ), only when athletes were divided based on menstrual cyclicity (i.e. irregularly cycling athletes had higher scores than athletes with normal menstrual cycle lengths). No differences in these scores were found between non-athletes with normal or irregular menstrual cycle lengths. In conclusion, irregularly short or long menstrual cycle length is associated with subtle indications of higher risk of disordered eating in female athletes.     

Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education

We provide here a brief historical analysis of a movement in progress from a belief‐based “mystery” model to an evidence‐based “mastery” model of giftedness and talent development. We have observed that educators concerned about exceptionally capable learners are moving from a categorical notion of “the typical gifted child” with somewhat mysteriously defined attributes and learning needs, toward the perspective that some children have exceptionally advanced learning needs that require more flexibly responsive educational attention. We discuss factors that differentiate the two models, and observe some benefits of the shifting paradigm, arguing that by conceptualizing gifted education as providing a dynamically responsive educational match for students who otherwise experience a mismatch with the curriculum normally provided, the mastery model is socially, educationally, and politically more defensible. We discuss some practical implications of this shift in perspective.