Clinical Psychology: What is the present state of secular Mindfulness based

Mindfulness Programs Mindfulness Meditation programs in Schools by

experts
Three programs implemented in clinical Recent ‘upsurge’ in Mindfulness across clinical and Social
application and research:
science areas in particular (Crane et al., 2010) and in the Research indicated positive
public in general (Roeser, 2013).
wellbeing and attention outcomes
1. Kristin Neff & Christopher Germer’s for students (Meiklejohn et al., 2012;
Mindfulness ‘Self-Compassion’ (2015)
With the sheer volume of publications, lack of clarity of Mendelson et al., 2010; Monshat et

definition or an absence of rigorous understanding, quality al. 2012; Rempel, 2012; Zenner,
2. Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy in research and outcome of Mindfulness programs is Herrnleben-Kurz and Walach 2014).

(Segal & Williams, 2008)

uncertain (Kabat-Zinn, 2013); in other words ‘Conceptual
slippages’ (Baer, 2013).
Self-improvement regarding
3. Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction concentration, relaxation, control of
or MBSR (Jon Kabat-Zinn, 1990)
negative feelings and behaviours
(Rosaen et al., 2006; Wall, 2005).

Flook et al. (2013) and Goudha et al. (2016) note ‘Symbiotic relationship’ between
successful MBSR implementations by clinical Mindfulness and learning
Mindfulness Based Stress practioners for School Students and Teachers.
(Schoeberlein & Sheth, 2009).

Reduction
Kabat-Zinn’s MBSR program is written in
alignment of the ethical foundations its
Increase in academic outcomes and
increase of a standard deviation in
cognitive capacity (Zenner at al.,
“Can [school] teachers be trained by competent mindfulness
2014).

derived from (Hyland, 2015).

instructors to deliver [an effective] practice in their classrooms to
students?” (Schonert-Reichl & Roeser, 2016).

MBSR is a ‘solid benchmark for

effectiveness’ (Stanszus et al. 2017).

Meta-analysis of MBSR programs indicates Whole School

beneficial outcomes for ‘clinical’ and
What are the obstacles for MBSR in the Implementation
‘nonclinical’ participants (Grossman et al., classroom?
2004; Hoffman et al., 2010, Khourey et al, Longitudinal, ‘naturally’
2013).
Time constraints, scheduling, holidays, student voluntary building personal interest
participation, not applied to or embodied by school and avoiding ‘top-down’
administration staff and student-extra curricular are obstacles approach with school
for successful school Mindfulness programs (Beauchemin et leadership that avoids
al., 2008; Dane, 2011; Desmond & Hanich, 2010; Joyce, 2010).
reactivity (de Wolf &
Janssens, 2007; Lantieri,
Vygotsky 2008 Mintrop &
(1978 ): Social Sunderman, 2009 ).

Frequency and repetition of instructional,

Constructivism Contemporary research still needs to understand

‘invitational’ language used by Mindfulness

instructors leads to ‘internalisation’ (Roeser, [expert/clinical] Mindfulness teacher competency
Language of the and implementation fidelity (Kielty, 2017).
2016)
expert (teacher) is
internalised through
social-interaction by
the novice as a
private ‘inner- Successful classroom implementation depends upon Research Question
speech’. teachers enactment; descriptive rather than prescriptive What does the present literature indicate are the key elements to
approaches (Joyce; 2010; Parker & Kupersmidt, 2016). successfully implementing a Mindfulness based program in a School?