Mindfulness

DOI 10.1007/s12671-016-0603-z

ORIGINAL PAPER

Results of a Mindfulness-Based Social-Emotional Learning

Program on Portuguese Elementary Students and Teachers:
a Quasi-Experimental Study
Joana Sampaio de Carvalho 1 & Alexandra Marques Pinto 1 & João Marôco 2

# Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Abstract Recently, mindfulness-based social-emotional to the academic curriculum a SEL program through mindful-
learning (SEL) approaches have been taught to children in ness practices.
some schools. Due to deficient methodological consistency
observed in most studies, their results should be interpreted Keywords Social and emotional skills . Mindfulness .
with caution. Moreover, research on how mindfulness-based Children . Teachers . Schools
SEL approaches benefit teachers is scarce, and the majority of
these studies have been conducted in English-speaking coun-
tries; therefore, it is uncertain whether these approaches are Introduction
suited to other cultural backgrounds. The aim of the present
study was to evaluate the efficacy of the MindUp curriculum, According to international reports, at least 20 % of young
an SEL program through mindfulness practice for Portuguese people present one mental health problem before the age of
students and teachers. Participants included 454 3rd and 4th 18, and the onset of major mental illness may occur as early as
grade students and 20 teachers from state schools. A quasi- 7 to 11 years of age (Kessler et al. 2005). In Portugal, the
experimental (pre- and post-test) study compared outcomes results of the health behavior in school-aged children study
for an experimental group with a waitlist control group. Data have indicated that since 2010, a global decrease in mental and
were collected from teachers and children through self-report physical health among adolescents has been observed (Gaspar
measures. Results showed that over 50 % of the children who de Matos et al. 2015). Hence, there is clearly an increasing
participated in the MindUp program scored above the control number of young people at schools who experience emotional
group mean in their ability to regulate emotions, to experience and mental health problems, which in turn, affect a wide range
more positive affect, and to be more self-compassionate, and of outcomes, including academic performance, obesity, and
over 50 % scored lower in negative affect. In the group of risk behaviors (e.g., substance use and violence; Institute of
teachers, over 80 % scored above the control group mean in Medicine and National Research Council 2009).
observing, in personal accomplishment, and in self-kindness. As children spend many hours in schools, the latter are
Our results contribute to the recent research on the potential thought to be a crucial context for the development of social
added value of mindfulness practices to a SEL program and and emotional skills along with academic competencies. Jones
strengthen the importance for teachers and students of adding et al. (2013) suggested that schools should incorporate the
teaching and reinforcement of these skills into their daily in-
teractions with children in order to promote children’s and
* Joana Sampaio de Carvalho youths’ mental health and well-being. Several decades of re-
[email protected] search have shown that the promising and potential lifetime
benefits of preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral
1
Faculdade de Psicologia da Universidade de Lisboa, Alameda da (MEB) disorders are enhanced by focusing on young people
Universidade, 1949-013 Lisboa, Portugal and that early interventions, such as social-emotional learning
2
ISPA-IU—Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Rua Jardim do (SEL), can be effective in delaying or preventing the onset of
Tabaco no. 34, 1149-041 Lisboa, Portugal such disorders (Helliwell et al. 2015). For instance, the
 Mindfulness

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council (2009) in which the values of personal growth, learning, moral living,
argued that social-emotional learning programs promote pos- and caring for others are also nurtured.^ Some authors argued
itive youth development while preventing mental health prob- that introducing these practices in educational settings might
lems as well as substance abuse, violence, and other antisocial yield twofold benefits. Firstly, the regular repetition of these
behaviors. Through explicit instruction and student-centered practices can produce changes in the brain circuits and com-
learning approaches, children and youths may develop funda- plex cognitive functions (Klingberg 2010). Consequently, re-
mental skills such as: self-awareness, self-management, social searchers are now beginning to explore these potential bene-
awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision- fits of contemplative practices for children, adolescents, and
making (CASEL 2013). their caregivers (Black et al. 2009; Roeser and Peck 2009).
There is a body of evidence revealing that social and emo- Secondly, these practices may improve teachers’ professional
tional skills correlate positively with good adjustment out- development by nurturing their social and emotional skills and
comes (e.g., health and wealth) and negatively with a diversity pro-social dispositions such as empathy and compassion.
of problems (e.g., crime; e.g., Moffitt et al. 2011). More spe- Furthermore, according to Jennings and Greenberg (2009),
cifically, recent literature reviews have indicated that SEL in- the development of these skills in teachers may help them to
terventions foster social and emotional skills with the largest create a caring and cooperative classroom learning environ-
average significant effect sizes in relation to other interven- ment. These practices may vary in nature; however, they share
tions’ outcomes (e.g., Payton et al. 2008; Weare and Nind a focus on sharpening concentration and attention: yoga, tai
2011; Wilson and Lipsey 2007). With regard to self-esteem chi, mindfulness mediation, guided imagination, telling
and self-confidence, results have also shown a positive mod- stories, music, art, and literature (Lantieri and Nambiar
erate impact (Payton et al. 2008). Additionally, reviews have 2012; Roeser and Peck 2009).
indicated that SEL programs improved positive attitudes to- Even though implementation of these practices is fairly
wards school and enhanced school achievement (e.g., Durlak recent, one of the most studied contemplative practices in an
et al. 2011; Payton et al. 2008; Wilson and Lipsey 2007). As educational context is mindfulness (e.g., Greenberg and Harris
far as mental health problems and problematic behavior are 2011; Zelazo and Lyons 2012). The practice of mindfulness
concerned, research has pointed to SEL interventions having a involves the reflexive contemplation of one’s experience—
positive effect on the reduction of anxiety, depression, and body sensations, feelings, states of mind, and experiential phe-
emotional distress; on the prevention of behavioral problems, nomena—and a close repetitive observation of the object
such as drug abuse; and on the prevention of aggressive and (Bodhi 2011). Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh (Hanh 1987)
antisocial behavior (Durlak et al. 2011; Wilson and Lipsey referred to mindfulness as keeping one’s consciousness alive
2007). Two recent meta-analyses have replicated these results to be aware and awake at every moment of daily life and to be
(Durlak et al. 2011; Sklad et al. 2012) and Durlak et al. (2011), present and at one with those around you. Among Western
in particular, based on the analysis of 213 studies. They con- researchers, the definition proposed by Kabat-Zinn (2003) is
cluded that SEL programs led to an improvement of 25 % in one of the most commonly used among researchers in this
social and emotional skills, of 11 % in achievement tests, and domain. Kabat-Zinn (2003) described mindfulness as Bthe
to a decrease of 10 % in classroom misbehavior, anxiety, and awareness that emerges through paying attention on purpose,
depression, which were sustained for at least 6 months after in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally to the unfolding
the intervention. Additionally, other studies suggested that the of experience moment by moment^ (2003, p. 144). An affec-
ability to regulate emotions through the active and positive tionate attitude of non-harming (loving kindness, compassion,
participation of children in a social context may promote the sympathetic joy, and equanimity) towards others and our-
development of social skills, such as cooperation and asser- selves is also inherent to the definition of mindfulness
tiveness, and the improvement of positive emotions enhances (Cullen 2011).
cognitive functioning (flexible thinking) and self-regulation Educational settings may be a fundamental context for the
and facilitates positive psychosocial functioning, which in introduction of mindfulness approaches in order to teach chil-
turn, can contribute to flourishing mental health (Blair et al. dren and youths how to pay attention and cultivate attitudes
2015; Davis and Suveg 2014). Furthermore, students with such as kindness, curiosity, and non-judgment (Weare 2014).
more positive affect have shown higher academic scores than Therefore, mindfulness-based interventions have recently
those who have negative affect (Lyubomirsky et al. 2011). started to be implemented in school settings, both through
More recently, growing interest in another educational ap- the adaptations of adult programs and through the develop-
proach to promote students’ social and emotional skills—con- ment of specific interventions for children and teachers. Some
templative education—has been noted. Roeser and Peck of the interventions for children and youths were adapted from
(2009, p. 127) defined contemplative education as Ba set of the MBSR program for adults. Examples of these programs
pedagogical practices designed to cultivate the potentials of are: the MBSR-T for adolescents, tested on youths aged be-
mindful awareness and volition in an ethical-relational context tween 14 and 18 years (Biegel et al. 2009); the mindfulness in
Mindfulness

schools project, for children and youths aged between 7 and and planning skills to manage their life situations in a
17 years (Kuyken et al. 2013); and the mindful schools for more helpful/positive way.
children and youth, aged between 5 and 17 years (Fernando Considering the aims and results of SEL programs and of
2013). In terms of the mindfulness practice, teachers and clin- mindfulness-based interventions, one may observe that both
ical practitioners have introduced a number of adaptations approaches have similar goals, namely the promotion of emo-
such as simplifying instructions, shortening its duration, mak- tional regulation, composure, compassion, and empathy (Baer
ing it less abstract (often by introducing physical props and 2006). In this sense, some authors considered that mindfulness
using vivid metaphors and images), and utilizing more practices might be complementary to the SEL approach, re-
movement-based activities to enhance children and youths’ ducing stress in students and promoting/reinforcing their emo-
understanding of the goals of mindfulness exercises (Zelazo tional and social skills and well-being (Lantieri and Nambiar
and Lyons 2012). Children also need a balance between silent 2012; Lawlor 2016; Weare 2014). While SEL interventions
practices and inquiry and interactive classroom strategies, promote learning from the outside in, mindfulness-based in-
such as pair or group work, games, and role play. terventions emphasize learning from the inside out. In SEL,
However, research in the field of mindfulness-based ap- the teacher teaches skills and time is given to the students to
proaches for children and youths is still in its early stages, practice these skills. Mindfulness-based approaches help stu-
and therefore, presents some limitations such as few random- dents to become aware and to experience the relationship be-
ized control trials, small sample sizes, heterogeneity of inter- tween their emotions, thoughts, and physical sensations to
vention types, and measurement methods (e.g., Greenberg and regulate their emotions, which in turn, have an impact on their
Harris 2011; Kallapiran et al. 2015; Meiklejohn et al. 2012). behavior, levels of stress, interpersonal relationships, and the
For instance, with regard to the measurement of mindfulness, ability to focus their attention. Regarding the intervention, the
some authors argued that besides the availability of different structure of SEL programs, often in the form of organized
scales (for adults) to assess mindfulness, none of these scales curriculum sessions implemented throughout the school year,
might be appropriately equipped to actually measure mindful- is a framework where mindfulness practices can be easily
ness (Bergomi et al. 2013). One of the reasons is the inclusion integrated (Weare and Nind 2011). As evidence for the impact
of items that may easily be misinterpreted, particularly by of mindfulness increases, work to link mainstream SEL with
respondents who are not familiar with the concept. mindfulness is currently being developed; however, it is still
Therefore, if this happens with adults, it is even more likely insufficient (Lantieri and Nambiar 2012; Lawlor 2016).
it will also happen with children. Nevertheless, MindUP is one of the two programs (The
Nevertheless, a meta-analysis performed on 20 stud- Hawn Foundation 2011) accredited by CASEL as an effective
ies mainly conducted in schools showed an overall social and emotional learning program as shown in a random-
small effect size (d = 0.227) for universal mindfulness ized control trial with 99 fourth and fifth grade classes con-
interventions and also an increase in mindfulness and ducted by Schonert-Reichl et al. (2015). This study included
attention (d = 0.280; Zoogman et al. 2014). Potential self-report assessments of well-being, social and emotional
benefits of mindfulness approaches have been found competencies, school self-concept, mindful attention, and
for non-clinical (children in school settings) and clinical awareness. Additionally, this research integrated an evaluation
populations and include: a reduction of problematic be- of students’ executive function and stress physiology (via di-
haviors, a reduction of anxiety and depression, a urnal salivary cortisol). The results indicated that, compared
strengthening of self-regulation and impulse control, an with the control group, students who participated in the
enhancement of attention skills, physical and emotional MindUP program showed a significant increase in optimism,
well-being, cognitive skills, social and emotional com- emotional control, empathy, perspective taking, pro-social
petence, and self-esteem and self acceptance (Kallapiran goals, and mindful attention, in addition to a decrease in de-
et al. 2015; Meiklejohn et al. 2012; Weare 2013, 2014). pressive symptoms. In terms of executive functions, they
The importance of these findings is related to the fact proved to be more attentive and capable of restraining or hold-
that low levels of emotion control and high levels of ing back distractions while performing computer tasks.
negative emotion are associated with externalizing prob- Teachers, in addition to their academic teaching role, are
lems (Kim et al. 2007). Contrary to adult populations, expected to actively participate in the promotion of students’
none of the afore-mentioned studies found significant mental health and well-being (Weare 2014). Due to the diffi-
effects of mindfulness-based interventions on children’s cult demands of their work, teachers feel increasingly stressed
self-compassion. Nevertheless, this might be an impor- and teachers’ stress and burnout can affect their health and
tant skill to be promoted among children as, according well-being and may interfere in students’ learning and engage-
to Welford and Langmead (2015), self-compassionate ment (Jennings and Greenberg 2009; Roeser et al. 2013).
students were more adaptive in coping with academic Even though there are few programs that have addressed this
failures and were more likely to use reflective, creative, problem (Jennings et al. 2013), increased interest has also
 Mindfulness

recently been observed in using mindfulness-based interven- (SD = 0.97), 98 females and 122 males, and 167 were in
tions to help teachers improve their teaching skills, promoting the 3rd grade and 56 in the 4th grade. The control group
their well-being, self-awareness, and self-regulation and to included 231 children with a mean age of 8.5 (SD = 1.04),
address job stress and burnout, for example, the cultivating 115 females and 112 males, and 131 were in the 3rd grade
awareness and resilience in education program (Jennings and 100 were in the 4th grade.
2016; Jennings and Greenberg 2009; Jennings et al. 2013). Sample 2 was comprised of 20 Portuguese teachers, all
Although studies on the effectiveness of mindfulness pro- of whom were female, which is the norm in Portuguese
grams for teachers are scarce and lack methodological rigor, elementary schools, with ages ranging from 33 to 55 years
a review of three teacher programs has revealed some prom- (M = 40.37, SD = 6.30). All the teachers had over 10 years
ising results such as significant improvement in mindfulness, of teaching experience (M = 16.44, SD = 5.40) and 95 % had
mental well-being, self-efficacy, and also teachers’ skills to obtained a bachelor’s degree in education. The experimental
manage the classroom effectively and to establish supportive group consisted of 13 teachers with a mean of age 41.3 years
relationships with students (Meiklejohn et al. 2012). (SD = 6.77), with a mean of 16 years of teaching experience
Additionally, recent studies have observed an increase in (SD = 5.92) and 92 % had obtained a bachelor’s degree. The
self-compassion, reappraisal, self-efficacy, student engage- control group included 7 teachers with a mean of age
ment, sense of efficacy in instruction, personal accomplish- 38.7 years (SD = 5.47) with a mean of 17 years of teaching
ment, mindfulness, and a significant decrease in stress and experience (SD = 4.62) and 100 % had obtained a bachelor’s
anxiety (Jennings 2014, 2016). However, as suggested by degree.
Schonert-Reichl et al. (2015) there is a need for research that The national education system in Portugal is organized
explores the benefits for teachers that occur as a result of their geographically in school clusters from kindergarten up to high
implementation of a SEL program that includes mindfulness school. A convenience sampling approach was used to select
practices. Also, the majority of studies, both on children twelve schools from four clusters across three suburban mu-
and teachers, have been conducted in English speaking nicipalities in the Lisbon District that were equivalent in terms
countries, so it is uncertain whether these approaches of socioeconomic status (middle socioeconomic level). The
are suitable for other children and teachers worldwide random participants distribution between the experimental
(Kallapiran et al. 2015). group and the control group was conducted so as to guarantee
Therefore, this study has two main objectives. Firstly, to both groups were equal in size and socio-economic
evaluate the efficacy of MindUP, a classroom and evidence- characteristics.
based program incorporating mindfulness practices, in child
outcomes. More specifically, we hypothesize that MindUP Procedure
students, compared with a control group, will improve in pos-
itive affect, emotion regulation, self-compassion and mindful- Intervention procedures
ness. Secondly, this study aims to explore how MindUP im-
pacts on teachers’ outcomes and hypothesizes that MindUP The intervention was a 50-h course (consisting of 25 h
teachers, compared with the control group, improve in mind- delivered by an expert and 25 h of program implementation
fulness, self-compassion, emotion regulation skills and by teachers) over 6 sessions. The duration of the course was
burnout. twelve and a half hours longer than that offered by the
Hawn Foundation for two reasons. First, the contents (social
and emotional learning, mindfulness, neuroscience and
Method positive psychology) were quite new to teachers so they
had to be clarified theoretically and gain experience through
Participants practice. Thus, teachers trained their mindfulness skills,
experimented and rehearsed how to implement each session
The participants were from two different samples: sample and expanded their knowledge on how each theoretical
one comprised children from elementary school and sample component could benefit the promotion of social and emo-
two comprised the teachers of these children. Sample 1 tional skills and on managing the classroom in a positive
included 454 students with a mean age of 8.5 years way. Second, for each 25 h of training, certified by the
(SD = 1.00), 51.5 % of whom were male. All the children Portuguese Ministry of Education, teachers receive a credit.
attended elementary school, the majority of whom were in Hence, those teachers who participated in this study and who
the 3rd (65.4 %) and 4th grade. Almost all the pupils were successfully completed the training sessions received 2 credits
Portuguese (95 %) and distributed across 12 schools from for their career development. The participants were divided
three municipalities in the Lisbon District. The experimen- into three training groups and the training sessions were im-
tal group comprised 223 children with a mean age of 8.5 plemented at two different stages of the school year for each
Mindfulness

group: in September/October 2012 and January/February ending the exercise back on the sound, without judgment,
2013. The teachers began to implement the MindUP program while remaining responsive to their internal and external ex-
after the second training session. Teachers did not have to fund periences (pleasurable, neutral or difficult). This practice is
the training or pay for the manual for the implementation of carried out every day for 3 min, three times a day—in the
the program as well as the chime to do the mindfulness morning, after the lunch break, and at the end of the class. A
practice. more detailed description of the MindUP program can be
found in the book chapter by Maloney et al. (2016).
Program
Data Collection Procedures
The MindUP program is a comprehensive classroom and
evidence-based curriculum that has taken over a decade to The study was approved by the Scientific and Ethical Council
construct by leading experts in the fields of cognitive devel- of the Faculty of Psychology, University of Lisbon, and by the
opmental neuroscience, SEL and positive psychology (such General Directorate for Education of the Portuguese Ministry
as Adele Diamond, Kimberly Schonert-Reichl). The feedback of Education and Science.
of teachers was also taken into consideration during the de- An invitation letter and the questionnaires were sent to the
velopment of the program. It aims to enhance students’ self- Principals of selected schools with a view to obtaining their
awareness, focused attention, self-regulation, and to reduce permission to conduct the study. Students were required to
stress. The program is organized into three levels: pre- obtain written informed parental consent and teachers also
school to 2nd grade; 3rd to 5th grade; and 6th to 8th grade. signed an informed consent. There were no exclusion criteria
For each level a manual, adapted to each developmental and participation was voluntary.
phase, was created with detailed instructions for the imple- Data was collected for teachers and children at two points:
mentation of each session. The classroom teacher implements before the beginning of the implementation (for children) and
the program after receiving 25 h of training (see Intervention before training (for teachers); and after conclusion of the pro-
procedures). As this study focused on the 3rd grade of the gram implementation (end of school year). All questionnaires
elementary school, the second level manual was used. The were administered to students in groups, at school, during a
manual and worksheets used for the implementation of the pre-arranged class period, in the presence of a teacher. At the
MindUP program were translated and adapted to the beginning of the session, a member of the research team read a
Portuguese language with the help of teachers, who reviewed standardized set of instructions to the pupils and assured them
the adequacy of the contents to the Portuguese educational that their answers would remain anonymous and confidential.
system, and a linguist, who reviewed the suitability of the All participants were reminded that there were no right or
Portuguese language. wrong answers. To ensure that all students understood what
The curriculum comprises 15 lessons taught sequentially was being requested, all items were read aloud and students
once a week for approximately 45–60 min and is organized in answered them at the same time. Teachers answered the ques-
4 units. Each lesson comprises mindfulness practices along tionnaires individually, and anonymity and confidentiality
with different activities that allow children to learn about their were again assured.
brain, understand how their feelings and thoughts affect their
actions and learn ways of becoming a caring and altruistic Measures
person. Therefore, in units 1 and 2, children learn how training
their focused awareness might affect their brain and then prac- Children Measures
tice mindfulness on their senses (e.g., mindful seeing, mindful
smelling). In unit 3, children learn social and emotional un- Positive and Negative Affect Positive and negative affect
derstanding through the practice of perspective taking, opti- were measured using a Portuguese version (name deleted to
mism and savoring happy experiences. Lastly, in unit 4, chil- maintain the integrity of the review process) of the PANAS-C
dren have the opportunity to put mindful awareness into prac- (Laurent et al. 1999). This measure comprised 27 items struc-
tice by practicing gratitude, performing acts of kindness and tured in two subscales: positive affect (15 items; e.g., BIndicate
by planning, in a group context, a social project to benefit their to what extent you have felt happy over the past 2 weeks^) and
school community. The program also entails a set of suggested negative affect (12 items; e.g., BIndicate to what extent you
activities (e.g., math, language, social, and emotional learn- have felt sad over the past 2 weeks^). Children rated how often
ing) that teachers can integrate into daily classroom activities they had felt each emotion or feeling (e.g., sad and interested)
that serve to generalize the skills learned. Beyond the 15 les- over the past 2 weeks on a 5-point rating scale ranging from 1
sons, the program contains the core formal mindfulness prac- (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely). The validation
tice that involves firstly focusing attention on a single resonant study of the original PANAS-C reported good internal consis-
sound, then on one’s breathing and body sensations and tency of .89 for positive affect and .92 for negative affect,
 Mindfulness

assessed via Cronbach’s alphas. The results of the study of the the positive and negative aspects of self-compassion orga-
confirmatory factor model of the Portuguese version indicated nized in 6 subscales: self-kindness (5 items; e.g., BI try to be
that the best model fit had the same factor structure as the loving towards myself when I’m feeling sad, angry, lonely, or
original PANAS-C version, but with 9 items less: positive afraid^) versus self-judgment (5 items; reverse-coded; e.g.,
affect (7 items) and negative affect (10 items; experimental BI’m unkind to myself when I feel I’m not Bgood enough^);
group: χ2/df = 1.82, CFI = .932, TLI = .918, RMSEA = .061; common humanity (4 items; e.g., BWhen things are going
control group: χ 2 /df = 2.38, CFI = .917, TLI = .900, badly for me, I remember that difficulties are part of life, and
RMSEA = .061). The measurement invariance analysis across that everyone goes through them^) versus isolation (4 items;
the two groups and measure times (pre-test—T1 and post- reverse-coded; e.g., BWhen I think about things I don’t do
test—T2) revealed that this measure was invariant: configural well, I feel separate and cut off from everybody else in the
(T1 – Δχ2 (15) = 20.94, p = .14; T2 – Δχ2 (15) = 7.24, p = .95), world^); and mindfulness (4 items; e.g., BWhen something
metric (T1 – Δχ2 (30) = 36.98, p = .18; T2 – Δχ2 (30) = 23.72, upsets me I try to notice my emotions and not get carried away
p = .78) and scalar (T1 – Δχ 2 (15) = 15.19, p = .44; by them.^) versus over-identification (4 items; reverse-coded;
T2 – Δχ 2 (15) = 18.33, p = .25). For the present study, e.g., BWhen I’m feeling sad, angry, lonely, or afraid I tend to
Cronbach’s alphas at pre-test and post-test for the positive focus on and worry about everything that’s wrong.^).
affect subscale were .82 and .84 respectively, and for the neg- Responses were given on a 5-point rating scale ranging from
ative affect subscale .82 and .84, respectively. 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). A Portuguese version of
this scale (name deleted to maintain the integrity of the review
Emotional Control A Portuguese version (name deleted to process) was used and its factorial validity and invariance
maintain the integrity of the review process) of the emotional across the experimental and control groups were analyzed in
regulation questionnaire—children and adolescents (ERQ– the present study. The results of confirmatory factor analysis
CA; Gullone and Taffe 2012) was used to assess emotional for the best model fit to our data showed a different structure
control strategies. This questionnaire comprised 10 items or- from the original (K. Neff, personal communication,
ganized in two subscales: cognitive reappraisal (6 items; e.g., September 30, 2011). The modified SCS-C was composed
BWhen I want to feel happier, I think about something different^) by 4 subscales: self-kindness (5 items), common humanity
and expressive suppression (4 items; e.g., BI keep my (3 items), self-judgment (4 items), and mindfulness (4 items;
feelings to myself^). Responses were given on a 5-point rating experimental group: χ2/df = 1.16, CFI = .951, TLI = .941,
scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). RMSEA = .031; control group: χ2/df = 1.49, CFI = .902,
The validation study of the original ERQ–CA reported good TLI = .882, RMSEA = .047). Measurement invariance analy-
internal consistency of .83 for cognitive reappraisal and .75 sis across the two groups revealed that this measure was in-
for expressive suppression, assessed via Cronbach’s alphas. variant: configural (T1 – Δχ2 (14) = 11.02, p = .58; T2 – Δχ2
After conducting a confirmatory factor analysis of the (14) = 10.91, p = .69), metric (T1 – Δχ2 (28) = 21.15, p = .82;
Portuguese version of this questionnaire, the best model fit T2 – Δχ 2 (28) = 21.54, p = .80) and scalar (T1 – Δχ 2
to our data resulted in two subscales (with 2 items less): cog- (14) = 10.09, p = .76; T2 – Δχ2 (14) = 10.61, p = .72). In the
nitive reappraisal (5 items) and expressive suppression (3 present study, Cronbach’s alphas at pre-test and post-test for
items; experimental group: χ 2 /df = 2.07, CFI = .947, the self-kindness subscale were .64 and .70, respectively, .63
TLI = .912, RMSEA = .07; control group: χ 2 /df = 1.48, and .66, respectively, for the common humanity subscale; .70
CFI = .970, TLI = .951, RMSEA = .046). Measurement invari- and .65, respectively, for the self-judgment subscale and .57
ance analysis across the two groups revealed that this measure and .64, respectively, for the mindfulness subscale.
was invariant: configural (T1 – Δχ2 (6) = 11.14, p = .084;
T2 – Δχ2 (6) = 1.87, p = .93), metric (T1 – Δχ2 (12) = 17.09, Mindfulness The mindful attention awareness scale adapted
p = .15; T2 – Δχ2 (12) = 5.75, p = .93) and scalar (T1 – Δχ2 for children (MAAS-C; Lawlor et al. 2013) was used to assess
(6) = 5.39, p = .50; T2 – Δχ2 (6) = 4.09, p = .66). In the current the frequency of mindful states over time among children
study, Cronbach’s alphas at pre-test and post-test for the cog- (e.g., BI could be feeling a certain way and not realize it until
nitive reappraisal subscale were .63 and .68, respectively, and later^). This scale comprised 15 items and children rated their
for the expressive suppression subscale were .71 and .71, responses on a 6-point rating scale from 1 (almost always) to 6
respectively. (almost never). The study by Lawlor et al. (2013) reported
good internal consistency of .84 assessed via Cronbach’s al-
Self-Compassion Self-compassion was assessed with the phas. The results from the study of the confirmatory factor
self-compassion scale—children (SCS—C) (K. Neff, personal model of the Portuguese version (name deleted to maintain
communication, September 30, 2011). This scale was not pub- the integrity of the review process) indicated that the best
lished; however, permission from the author was granted to model fit had the same structure with 10 items less (experi-
use it in the present study. It consisted of 26 items that measure mental group: χ 2 /df = 2.12, CFI = .952, TLI = .910,
Mindfulness

RMSEA = .072; control group: χ2/df = 2.02, CFI = .961, Burnout Teachers’ perceived experience of burnout in rela-
TLI = .927, RMSEA = .067). The measurement invariance tion to their work was assessed using the Maslach burnout
analysis across the two groups revealed that this measure inventory—educators survey (Maslach et al. 1996;
was invariant: configural (T1 – Δχ2 (4) = 2.95, p = .57; Portuguese version by Marques Pinto et al. 2005). This mea-
T2 – Δχ2 (4) = 6.12, p = .19), metric (T1 – Δχ2 (8) = 4.76, sure consisted of 22 items divided into three subscales: emo-
p = .78; T2 – Δχ 2 (8) = 8.91.54, p = .35), and scalar tional exhaustion (9 items; e.g., BI feel emotionally drained
(T1 – Δχ2 (4) = 1.71, p = .79; T2 – Δχ2 (4) = 2.12, p = .71. In from my work^; α = .90), depersonalization (5 items; e.g., BI
the present study, Cronbach’s alphas at pre-test and post-test feel I treat some recipients as if they were impersonal objects^;
for this scale were .70. α = .56), and personal accomplishment (8 items, reversed;
e.g., BI have accomplished many worthwhile things in this
Teachers’ Measures job^; α = .76). The participants rated their personal feelings
and attitudes on a 7-point frequency scale, ranging from 0
Emotional Control The emotion regulation questionnaire (never) to 6 (every day).
(ERQ) (Gross and John 2003; Portuguese version by Vaz
and Martins 2008) evaluated the way teachers regulate their Data Analysis
emotions. This questionnaire comprised 10 items organized in
two subscales: Reappraisal (6 items; e.g., BI control my emo- In order to detect baseline group differences in the self-
tions by changing the way I think about the situation I’m in^; report measures, multivariate analyses of covariance
α = .80) and Suppression (4 items; BI control my emotions by (MANCOVA) were conducted, controlling for age, gender,
not expressing them^; α = .73). Teachers rated their responses and school year. With a view to addressing the program
on a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to effects on children and teachers, we used MANCOVAs
7 (strongly agree). followed by analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) for signif-
icant MACOVAs. For this analysis, we first verified the
Self-Compassion Teachers’ self-compassion was assessed by MANOVA assumptions. For the multivariate normality as-
the self-compassion scale (SCS; Neff 2003; Portuguese ver- sumption, we used the Shapiro–Wilk test (p ≥ 0.05 for the
sion by Castilho and Pinto-Gouveia 2011). This scale mea- two groups); and the homogeneity of covariance matrices
sures how participants are kind and understanding toward for each group was analyzed with the M Box test
themselves in difficult times. The 26 items were organized (Marôco 2014). Secondly, and in line with Tabachnick
according to the same structure of the child version with lan- and Fidell (2001), in order to understand the direction of
guage adaptations (e.g., BI’m disapproving and judgmental change from pre-test to post-test, we computed difference
about my own flaws and inadequacies^) and presented good scores (post-test minus pre-test) that were used as depen-
reliability for all subscales: self-kindness (α = .84), common dent variables and type of group (experimental vs control)
humanity (α = .77), self-judgment (α = .82), mindfulness as the independent variable, controlling for the variables
(α = .73), isolation (α = .75), and over-identified (α = .78). proving to be significant at baseline. In order to evaluate
Teachers rated their responses on a 5-point rating scale rang- the magnitude of program outcome, effect sizes were cal-
ing from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). culated. For MANCOVAs, we calculated the partial eta
squared (η2p), and for two group comparisons (control vs
Mindfulness The five facets of mindfulness questionnaire experimental), Cohen’s d was computed. Cohen’s d values
(FFMQ) (Baer 2006; Portuguese version by Gregório and between 0.20 and 0.40 were considered small effect sizes,
Gouveia 2011) was used to assess teachers’ general tendency values between 0.5 and 0.7 moderate effect sizes and
to be mindful in daily life. This questionnaire comprised 39 values above 0.8 represented large effect sizes (Cohen
items distributed across five subscales: observing (8 items; 1992; Durlak 2009). In order to help clarify the practical
e.g., BWhen I’m walking, I deliberately notice the sensations importance of an intervention’s effect, an improvement
of my body movingB; α = .78), describing (8 items; e.g., BI’m index was used, based on Cohen’s U3 index, which con-
good at finding words to describe my feelingsB; α = .88), act- verts an effect into a percentile gain manifested by the
ing with awareness (8 items; e.g., BWhen I do things, my mind target group (Durlak 2009). The improvement index rep-
wanders off and I’m easily distractedB; α = .89), non-reactivity resents the difference between the percentile rank of the
to inner experience (7 items; e.g., BI perceive my feelings and MindUP mean and the percentile rank corresponding to
emotions without having to react to themB; α = .66), and non- the control group mean (i.e., 50th percentile) in the control
judging of inner experience (8 items; e.g., BI criticize myself group distribution. Alternatively, the improvement index
for having irrational or inappropriate emotionsB; α = .86). may be interpreted as the expected change in percentile
Items were rated on a 5-point rating scale ranging from 1 rank for an average control group student when the stu-
(never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true). dent has been subject to the intervention (IES 2008).
 Mindfulness

Results Follow-up ANCOVA (Table 5) results showed a significant

improvement from pre to post-test in positive affect and no
Students significant difference between the two groups from pre to
post-test for mindfulness. Thirdly, we performed a
MANCOVA was used to analyze the baseline differences be- MANOVA for negative affect, self-judgment, and reappraisal
tween the experimental group and the control group in affect with difference scores as dependent variables and type of
(positive and negative affect), emotion control (suppression group as the independent variable. The results showed no
and reappraisal), self-compassion (self-kindness, common hu- significant main effect for group (Table 4). However, follow-
manity, mindfulness, and self-judgment), and mindfulness, up ANOVAs indicated that compared with the control group,
controlling for age, gender, and school year. Results in children who had participated in MindUP showed a signifi-
Table 1 showed that there were no significant differences for cant decrease in negative affect and for reappraisal and self-
the effect of group across all the outcome variables. judgment no significant differences were found (Table 5).
Nevertheless, age and school year had a significant effect Fourthly, an ANCOVA was performed for mindfulness (self-
across outcome variables; however, gender showed no signif- compassion subscale), controlling for school year (shown to
icant differences. In Table 2, follow-up ANCOVAs indicated have a significant effect at baseline) and results also showed
that age had a significant effect on self-kindness, common no significant differences between the two groups (Table 5).
humanity, positive affect, suppression, and mindfulness
(self-compassion subscale); and school year had a significant Teachers
effect on self-kindness, suppression, common humanity and
mindfulness. In order to determine the direction of change, First, we used MANCOVA to analyze the baseline differences
pre-test, post-test means and standard deviations were com- between the experimental group and the control group in emo-
puted (for all dependent variables) for the experimental group tion control (reappraisal and suppression), self-compassion (self-
and control group (Table 3). kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindful-
In order to test the effects of the MindUP program on chil- ness, and over-identified), mindfulness (observing, describing,
dren’s self-report, we first conducted a MANCOVA for sup-
pression, common humanity and self-kindness, with differ-
ence scores as dependent variables and type of group as the Table 2 Children sample—follow-up ANCOVA for age and school
independent variable, controlling for age and school year effects on variables outcomes
(shown to have a significant effect at baseline). The results Variable df Error F p d Observed
presented in Table 4 indicated a quasi-significant group main df power
effect, a significant effect of school year and quasi-significant
difference for age. Follow-up ANCOVAs (Table 5) indicated Age
that compared with the control group, children who had par- Positive affect 1 420 6.091 .014 0.23 0.692
ticipated in the MindUP program showed a significant de- Negative affect 1 420 1.575 .210 0.12 0.240
crease in suppression, a quasi significant improvement in Reappraisal 1 420 2.485 .116 0.15 0.350
common humanity and no significant differences in self-kind- Suppression 1 420 5.880 .016 0.23 0.677
ness. Secondly, we conducted a MANCOVA (Table 4) for Self-kindness 1 420 6.962 .009 0.25 0.749
positive affect and mindfulness (MAAS scale), controlling Common 1 420 5.508 .019 0.22 0.649
humanity
for age (shown to have a significant effect at baseline). The
Self-judgment 1 420 0.412 .522 0.061 0.098
results indicated a quasi-significant group main effect.
Mindfulness 1 420 2.519 .113 0.15 0.354
Mindfulness 1 420 4.031 .045 0.19 0.517
Table 1 Students sample—multivariate analysis of covariance of School year
baseline differences between the experimental group and the control
group in affect, emotion control, self-compassion and mindfulness, Positive affect 1 420 0.020 .888 0.01 0.052
controlling for age, gender, and school year Negative affect 1 420 0.015 .901 0.01 0.052
Reappraisal 1 420 0.010 .920 0.01 0.051
Variable Pillai’s df Error F p η2p Observed
Suppression 1 420 7.659 .006 0.26 0.789
trace df Power
Self-kindness 1 420 7.641 .006 0.26 0.788
Group 0.032 9 412 1.508 .143 .032 0.717 Common 1 420 4.173 .042 0.19 0.513
Age 0.066 9 412 3.223 .001 .066 0.810 humanity
Self-judgment 1 420 0.865 .353 0.09 0.153
School 0.062 9 412 3.048 .002 .062 0.974
year Mindfulness 1 420 12.369 .000 0.33 0.939
Gender 0.034 9 412 1.592 .115 0.34 0.745 Mindfulness 1 420 0.275 .601 0.05 0.082
Mindfulness

Table 3 Students self-report of affect, emotion control, self- MindUP program showed significant improvements from
compassion, and mindfulness
pre to post-test in observing, in personal accomplishment
Variable Experimental (n = 223) Control (n = 231) and a quasi-significant effect in self-kindness (Table 9). For
the remaining variables no differences were found.
Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test

M SD M SD M SD M SD Practical Significance of MindUP effects on children

and teachers
PANAS
Positive affect 4.06 0.91 4.16 0.77 4.09 0.75 3.99 0.83
In order to better understand the practical significance of in-
Negative affect 1.97 0.83 1.85 0.75 1.89 0.76 1.93 0.76
corporating a SEL program integrating mindfulness practices
Emotion control
into the regular academic curriculum, we computed an im-
Reappraisal 4.11 0.91 3.95 0.77 4.04 0.79 3.98 0.78
provement index—Cohen’s U3 index—for each outcome.
Suppression 3.00 1.21 2.62 1.09 2.81 1.09 2.69 1.17
For children, an 8 % gain in Positive Affect, a 7 % gain in
Self-compassion
Common Humanity, and a reduction of 8 % in Negative
Self-kindness 2.95 1.00 3.19 0.93 3.13 0.95 3.21 1.02 Affect and in Suppression were observed. In other words,
Common humanity 2.78 1.04 3.08 1.11 3.13 1.9 3.12 1.09 58 % of the children who received MindUP scored above
Self-judgment 3.95 0.98 3.89 0.87 3.88 0.99 3.75 1.01 the control group mean in positive affect and 57 % in common
Mindfulness 2.86 0.99 3.03 0.98 3.01 0.94 3.21 0.93 humanity, while 58 % scored lower in negative affect and
Mindfulness 4.35 1.21 4.54 1.06 4.37 1.05 4.63 1.02 suppression. For teachers, a gain of 41 % in observing, 36 %
in personal accomplishment and 32 % in self-kindness was
observed. More specifically, 91 % of the teachers who imple-
mented MindUP scored above the control group mean in ob-
acting with awareness, non-judgmental, and non-reactive), and
serving, 86 % in personal accomplishment and 82 % in self-
burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal
kindness.
accomplishment) controlling for age and years of teaching.
Results showed that there were no significant differences for
the effect of group across all the outcome variables, as well as
for age and years of teaching (Table 6). In order to analyze the Discussion
direction of change, pre-test, post-test means, and standard devi-
ations were computed (for all dependent variables) for the exper- The purpose of the present study was to analyze the effects of
imental group and control group (Table 7). the MindUP program on 3rd and 4th grade children’s emotion
Secondly, a MANCOVA was conducted to test the ef- regulation skills, self-compassion, and affect. Additionally, we
fects of the MindUP program on all the teacher variables explored how the implementation of MindUP impacted
with difference scores as the dependent variable and type of teachers’ mindfulness, self-compassion, emotion regulation
group as the independent variable. The results indicated no skills and burnout. Globally, the findings of our study indicat-
significant main effect for group (Table 8). However, the ed that the integration of a SEL program with mindfulness
follow-up ANOVA results indicated that compared with the practices in the academic curriculum could benefit children’s
control group, the teachers who had participated in the social and emotional skills. Furthermore, our study has

Table 4 Students sample—multivariate analysis for suppression, common humanity, self-kindness, positive affect, mindfulness, negative affect, self-
judgment, and reappraisal

Variable Pillai’s trace df Error df F p η2p Observed power

MANCOVA for suppression, common humanity and self-kindness, with difference scores as dependent variables and type of group as the independent
variable, controlling for age, and school year
Group 0.016 4 433 2.406 .067 .016 0.600
Age 0.017 4 433 2.474 .061 .017 0.613
School year 0.025 4 433 3.680 .012 .025 0.802
MANCOVA for positive affect and mindfulness (MAAS scale), controlling for age
Group 0.013 4 433 2.852 .059 .013 0.558
MANOVA for negative affect, self-judgment, and reappraisal with difference scores as dependent variables and type of group as the independent variable
Group 0.014 3 431 2.150 .093 .014 0.547
 Mindfulness

Table 5 Students sample—follow-up analysis of covariance for Table 7 Teachers self-report of emotional control, burnout, self-com-
emotional control, self-compassion, mindfulness, and affect passion, and mindfulness

Variable df Error F p d Observed Variable Experimental (n = 13) Control (n = 7)

df power
Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test
Emotional control
Suppression 1 435 4.288 .039 0.20 0.542 M SD M SD M SD M SD
Reappraisal 1 443 1.062 .303 0.00 0.177
Emotion control
Self-Compassion
Reappraisal 4.35 1.57 5.38 0.88 4.48 1.02 4.93 0.84
Common 1 435 3.317 .069 0.25 0.443
Suppression 3.17 1.76 3.27 0.95 3.21 1.33 4.11 0.89
humanity
Self-kindness 1 435 0.659 .417 0.07 0.128 Burnout
Self-judgment 1 443 0.737 .391 0.08 0.137 Emotional 2.89 1.06 2.83 1.03 2.79 0.75 3.06 1.16
exhaustion
Mindfulness 1 444 0.007 .934 0.01 0.510
0.54 0.59 0.49 0.64 0.77 0.77 1.08 0.82
Affect Depersonaliza-
Positive affect 1 444 5.263 .022 0.21 0.629 tion
Negative affect 1 443 4.339 .037 0.20 0.553 Personal 4.42 0.75 4.83 0.89 4.51 1.12 4.34 0.68
accomplish-
ment
Self-compassion
yielded promising results in terms of the potential benefits for
Self-kindness 3.08 0.75 3.69 0.76 2.81 0.77 2.86 0.72
teachers who implement SEL programs that integrate mind-
Self-judgment 2.91 0.59 2.84 0.81 2.80 0.55 2.94 0.34
fulness practices.
Common 3.23 0.80 3.59 0.48 2.86 0.69 3.11 0.71
As for the effects on children, our results revealed that the humanity
children who participated in the MindUP program proved to Mindfulness 3.40 0.60 3.60 0.64 3.14 0.38 3.00 0.38
be able to take perspective on personal shortcomings and dif- Isolation 2.60 0.87 2.38 0.66 2.93 0.79 2.89 0.13
ficulties - children learned to recognize that everyone fails, Over- 3.02 0.90 2.67 0.85 3.07 0.85 3.00 0.57
makes mistakes, and gets it wrong sometimes (a dimension identification
of self-compassion). Although previous studies found no sig- Mindfulness
nificant impact of mindfulness interventions on children’s Observing 12.18 3.43 14.92 2.72 11.86 3.63 11.00 4.47
common humanity (a dimension of self-compassion) this Describing 22.46 7.94 23.62 5.77 24.43 4.93 23.43 4.58
may be a promising result regarding the educational context Acting with 25.46 5.09 24.66 2.70 26.14 6.98 24.57 6.45
awareness
(Welford and Langmead 2015). As for the absence of signif- Non- 16.69 4.01 16.23 3.89 18.29 4.61 18.71 3.54
icant effects on the remaining components of self-compassion, judgmental
this could be due to the scale used in our study. As far as we Non-reactive 20.38 1.94 23.33 2.43 19.57 3.86 20.71 2.50
know, there is no other study that analyzes the psychometric
properties of this scale for 8 year old children with a large
sample. et al. 2012; Weare 2013). Contrary to what we expected, no
The results of our study also showed that children who significant results were found for the reappraisal strategy
were engaged in MindUP revealed a significant decrease in among MindUP children; however, this could be owing to
suppressing their emotions, which could indicate that they both groups already having shown a high level in this skill
were more successful at mood repair (Gross and John 2003). at baseline.
This result is in keeping with previous studies (Meiklejohn In accordance with previous studies, children who partici-
pated in the MindUP program improved in positive emotions,
Table 6 Teachers sample—multivariate analysis of covariance of which can contribute to flourishing mental health and to im-
baseline differences between the experimental group and the control proving academic results (Davis and Suveg 2014; Lyubomirsky
group in emotion control, self-compassion, mindfulness, and burnout et al. 2011).
controlling for age and years of teaching

Variable Pillai’s df Error F p η2p Observed Table 8 Teachers sample—multivariate analysis of covariance
trace df Power between the experimental group and the control group in emotion
control, self-compassion, mindfulness, and burnout
Group 0.921 1 14 0.834 .708 .921 0.068
Variable Pillai’s df Error F p η2p Observed
Age 0.955 1 14 1.53 .567 .955 0.080 trace df power
School 0.934 1 14 1.014 .663 .934 0.071
year Group 0.756 3 16 0.581 .797 .756 0.093
Mindfulness

Table 9 Teachers sample—follow-up analysis of variance for group. It is also possible that the relatively small sample size
emotional control, burnout, self-compassion and mindfulness
of the teacher sample hindered the statistical power of the tests
Variable df Error F p d Observed to reveal significant results. Indeed, the analysis of effect sizes
df power for some variables revealed effects of moderate size.
Additionally, and in keeping with previous studies, our results
Emotion control
suggest the need for the application of a specific program for
Reappraisal 1 18 0.573 .459 0.37 0.111
teachers designed to boost the development of their socio-
Suppression 1 18 1.688 .210 0.64 0.234
emotional skills and their mindfulness (Jennings et al. 2012;
Burnout
Weare 2014).
Emotional 1 18 0.433 .519 0.33 0.096
Globally, more than half of the children and more
exhaustion
Depersonalization 1 18 1.371 .257 0.58 0.199 than two thirds of teachers who participated in the
Personal 1 18 4.97 .039 1.10 0.560 MindUP program scored above the control group mean.
accomplishment These results are a contribution to recent research on
Self-compassion the potential added value of mindfulness practices to a
Self-kindness 1 18 3.57 .075 0.93 0.432 SEL program and strengthen the importance for teachers
Self-judgment 1 18 0.461 .506 0.34 0.099 and students, of adding a SEL program to the academic
Common humanity 1 18 0.139 .713 0.18 0.064 curriculum through mindfulness practices.
Mindfulness 1 18 2.044 .170 0.71 0.273
Isolation 1 18 0.217 .647 0.23 0.073 Limitations and future directions
Over-identification 1 18 0.601 .448 0.38 0.114
Mindfulness Although the present study holds some promising results on
Observing 1 18 7.17 .015 1.32 0.717 the effects of mindfulness interventions for children and their
Describing 1 18 1.683 .211 0.64 0.233 benefits for the teachers who implement them, it has limita-
Acting with 1 18 0.144 .708 0.19 0.065 tions that warrant mention.
awareness Firstly, regarding the stability of the given changes, it is
Non-judgmental 1 18 0.419 .526 0.32 0.094 important to understand how long these changes will be
Non-reactive 1 18 2.056 .169 0.71 0.274 sustained. Therefore, it would be important to analyze
follow-up data for children and teachers.
Secondly, considering the design of the study, and in order
With regard to mindfulness, no significant effects were to validate our results, it would be highly important for future
observed on students who had participated in the MindUP research on MindUP effects to carry out an experimental study
program; therefore, our results are not in line with previous with the randomization of the groups. Additionally, future
studies, although it should be noted that most of the previous research with a larger sample of teachers is required to confirm
studies were conducted with older students. Moreover, this our results. Another important aspect is that, as far as we
may be related to the way mindfulness was evaluated as the know, there is currently no instrument for the evaluation of
existing measures for children are adaptations of adolescent mindfulness that is suitable for use with children (8 years), and
versions and during the data collection we noticed that chil- in this sense, it is essential for future research to construct a
dren had some difficulties understanding the content/meaning new scale that is developmentally tailored to children (e.g.
of the items. This fact has also been referred to by others pictorial format), which may include a qualitative dimension
authors (Bergomi et al. 2013). and interview methods (e.g., Mason and Hargreaves 2001).
Our study offers some encouraging results regarding the Thirdly, in terms of the implementation process and further
changes experienced by teachers who implemented a SEL understanding of the changes found in this study, it is very
program incorporating mindfulness practices. The results important to analyze the role of the quality and fidelity of
found are in consonance with previous studies on specific implementation and teachers’ characteristics and their effects
mindfulness interventions for teachers, showing that teachers on children’s outcomes (Berkel et al. 2011). Additionally, as
were more capable of noticing perceptual events that are prob- MindUP is a comprehensive program, it would be important
ably unnoticed by others and were able to be more supportive to investigate how the different components of the program
and caring toward themselves (Jennings 2014; Jennings et al. mediate the children’s outcomes, more specifically, by
2013; Roeser et al. 2013). assessing mindfulness as a mechanism of change (Kallapiran
Despite the fact that the results in the remaining variables et al. 2015). Another aspect, that was not the object of this
were not significant, the direction of the changes between pre- study, is the relationship between mindfulness and social and
test and post-test are in line with the expected results for the emotional learning. It is vital to understand if and how mind-
experimental group, which was not the case for the control fulness influences the development of socio-emotional skills
 Mindfulness

or the reverse, in order to help schools choose which kind of Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–
159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.
intervention program would best fit their needs and
Cullen, M. (2011). Mindfulness-based interventions: an emerging phe-
characteristics. nomenon. Mindfulness, 2(3), 186–193. doi:10.1007/s12671-011-
0058-1.
Acknowledgments This research was funded by grants (SFRH/BD/ Davis, M., & Suveg, C. (2014). Focusing on the positive: a review of the
77542/2011) from the Science and Technology Foundation, Portugal. role of child positive affect in developmental psychopathology.
Clinical Child Family Psychology Review, 17(2), 97–124.
Compliance with Ethical Standards doi:10.1007/s10567-013-0162-y.
Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes.
Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928. doi:10.1093
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
/jpepsy/jsp004.
interest.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., &
Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social
Ethical Standard All procedures performed involving human partici- and emotional learning: a meta-analysis of school-based universal
pants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432. doi:10.1111
Scientific and Ethical Council of the Faculty of Psychology, University /j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x.
of Lisbon and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amend- Fernando, R. (2013). Measuring the efficacy and sustainability of a
ments or comparable ethical standards. mindfulness-based in-class intervention. Retrieved from Mindful
Schools website: http://www.mindfulschools.org/pdf/Mindful-
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained for all child partic- Schools-Study-Highlights.pdf
ipants (children >7 years) through written parental consent and by all the Gaspar de Matos, M., Simões, C., Camacho, I., Reis, M., & Equipa
teachers involved in the study. Aventura Social. (2015). Relatório do estudo HBSC 2014—A
saúde dos adolescentes Portugueses em tempos de recessão.
Lisboa: Centro de Malária e Outras Doenças Tropicais/IHMT/UNL.
References Greenberg, M. T., & Harris, A. R. (2011). Nurturing mindfulness in children
and youth: current state of research. Child Development Perspectives,
6(2), 161–166. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00215.x.
Baer, R. A. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore Gregório, S., & Gouveia, J. P. (2011). Facetas de mindfulness:
facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45. doi:10.1177 características psicométricas de um instrumento de avaliação.
/1073191105283504. Psychologica, 54, 259–279. doi:10.14195/1647-8606_54_10.
Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion
mindfulness with self-report measures: existing scales and open is- regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-
sues. Mindfulness, 4(3), 191–202. doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0110-9. being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–
Berkel, C., Mauricio, A. M., Schoenfelder, E., & Sandler, I. N. (2011). 362. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348.
Putting the pieces together: an integrated model of program imple- Gullone, E., & Taffe, J. (2012). The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
mentation. Prevention Science, 12(1), 23–33. doi:10.1007/s11121- for Children and Adolescents (ERQ–CA): a psychometric evalua-
010-0186-1. tion. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 409–417. doi:10.1037
Biegel, G. M., Brown, K. W., Shapiro, S. L., & Schubert, C. M. (2009). /a0025777.
Mindfulness-based stress reduction for the treatment of adolescent Hanh, T. N. (1987). The miracle of mindfulness. Boston: Beacon.
psychiatric outpatients: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Helliwell, J., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (2015). World happiness report
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(5), 855–866. doi:10.1037 2015. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
/a0016241. IES. (2008). What works clearinghouse - procedures and standards hand-
Black, D. S., Milam, J., & Sussman, S. (2009). Sitting-meditation inter- book (Version 2.0). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
ventions among youth: a review of treatment efficacy. Pediatrics, Education’s National Center for Education Evaluation and
124(3), e532–e541. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-3434. Regional Assistance (NCEE).
Blair, B. L., Perry, N. B., O’Brien, M., Calkins, S. D., Keane, S. P., & Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2009). Preventing
Shanahan, L. (2015). Identifying developmental cascades among mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people:
differentiated dimensions of social competence and emotion regula- progress and possibilities. Washington, DC: The National
tion. Developmental Psychology, 51(8), 1062–1073. doi:10.1037 Academies Press. doi:10.17226/12480.
/a0039472. Jennings, P. (2014). Early childhood teachers’ well-being, mindfulness,
Bodhi, B. (2011). What does mindfulness really mean? A canonical per- and self-compassion in relation to classroom quality and attitudes
spective. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(1), 19–39. doi:10.1080 towards challenging students. Mindfulness, 6(4), 732–743.
/14639947.2011.564813. doi:10.1007/s12671-014-0312-4.
CASEL (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning). Jennings, P. (2016). CARE for teachers: A mindfulness-based approach
(2013). 2013 CASEL guide: effective social and emotional learning to promoting teachers’ social and emotional competence and well-
programs—preschool and elementary school edition. Chicago: being. In K. Schonert-Reichl & R. Roeser (Eds.), Handbook of
Author. mindfulness in education (pp. 133–148). New York: Springer.
Castilho, P., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2011). Auto-compaixão: Estudo da doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3506-2_9.
validação da versão Portuguesa da Escala de Auto-Compaixão e Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom:
da sua relação com as experiências adversas na infância, a teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and
comparação social e a psicopatologia [Self-compassion: validation classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491–
study of the Portuguese version of the self-compassion scale and its 525. doi:10.3102/0034654308325693.
association with early adverse experiences, social comparison and Jennings, P., Lantieri, L., & Roeser, R. (2012). Supporting educational
psychopathology]. Psychologica, 54, 203–229. doi:10.14195/1647- goals through cultivating mindfulness: approaches for teachers and
8606_54_8. students. In P. Brown, M. Corrigan, & A. Higgins-D’Alessandro
Mindfulness

(Eds.), Handbook of prosocial education (pp. 371–397). Lanham: Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach burnout
Rowan & Littlefield. inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists
Jennings, P. A., Frank, J. L., Snowberg, K. E., Coccia, M. A., & Press.
Greenberg, M. T. (2013). Improving classroom learning environ- Mason, O., & Hargreaves, I. (2001). A qualitative study of mindfulness-
based cognitive therapy for depression. British Journal of Medical
ments by Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education
Psychology, 74(2), 197–212. doi:10.1348/000711201160911.
(CARE): results of a randomized controlled trial. School Meiklejohn, J., Phillips, C., Freedman, M. L., Griffin, M. L.,
Psychology Quarterly, 28(4), 374–390. doi:10.1037/spq0000035. Biegel, G., Roach, A., & Saltzman, A. (2012). Integrating
Jones, S. M., Bouffard, S. M., & Weissbourd, R. (2013). Educators’ social mindfulness training into K-12 education: fostering the resil-
and emotional skills vital to learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 94, 62–65. ience of teachers and students. Mindfulness, 3(4), 291–307.
doi:10.1177/003172171309400815. doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0094-5.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J.,
present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, Harrington, H., & Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-
10(2), 144–156. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bpg016. control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the
Kallapiran, K., Koo, S., Kirubakaran, R., & Hancock, K. (2015). National Academy of Sciences, 108(7), 2693–2698. doi:10.1073
Effectiveness of mindfulness in improving mental health symptoms /pnas.1010076108.
of children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Child Adolescent Neff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure
Mental Health, 20(4), 182–194. doi:10.1111/camh.12113. self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2(3), 223–250. doi:10.1080
Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Merikangas, K. R., & /1529886030902.
Walters, E. E. (2005). Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distri- Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D.,
butions of DSM-IV disorders in the national comorbidity survey Schellinger, K. B., & Pachan, M. (2008). The positive impact of
replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 593–602. social and emotional learning for kindergarten to eighth-grade stu-
doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.593. dents: findings from three scientific reviews. Chicago: Collaborative
Kim, G., Walden, T., Harris, V., Karrass, J., & Catron, T. (2007). Positive for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
emotion, negative emotion, and emotion control in the externalizing Roeser, R. W., & Peck, S. C. (2009). An education in awareness: self,
problems of school-aged children. Child Psychiatry and Human motivation, and self-regulated learning in contemplative perspec-
Development, 37(3), 221–239. doi:10.1007/s10578-006-0031-8. tive. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 119–136. doi:10.1080
Klingberg, T. (2010). Training and plasticity of working memory. Trends /00461520902832376.
in Cognitive Sciences, 14(7), 317–324. doi:10.1016/j. Roeser, R. W., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Jha, A., Cullen, M., Wallace,
tics.2010.05.002. L., Wilensky, R., & Harrison, J. (2013). Mindfulness training
Kuyken, W., Weare, K., Ukoumunne, O. C., Vicary, R., Motton, N., and reductions in teacher stress and burnout: results from two
Burnett, R., & Huppert, F. (2013). Effectiveness of the mindfulness randomized, waitlist-control field trials. Journal of Educational
in schools programme: non-randomised controlled feasibility study. Psychology, 105(3), 787–804. doi:10.1037/a0032093.
The British Journal of Psychiatry, 203(2), 126–131. doi:10.1192 Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Oberle, E., Lawlor, M. S., Abbott, D., Thomson,
/bjp.bp.113.126649. K., Oberlander, T. F., & Diamond, A. (2015). Enhancing cognitive
and social–emotional development through a simple-to-administer
Lantieri, L., & Nambiar, M. (2012). Cultivating the social, emotional, and
mindfulness-based school program for elementary school children: a
inner lives of children and teachers. Reclaiming Children and Youth,
randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 51(1), 52–
21(2), 31–33.
66. doi:10.1037/a0038454.
Laurent, J., Catanzaro, S. J., Joiner, T. E., Rudolph, K. D., Potter, K. I.,
Sklad, M., Diekstra, R., Ritter, M. D., Ben, J., & Gravesteijn, C.
Lambert, S., & Gathright, T. (1999). A measure of positive and
(2012). Effectiveness of school-based universal social, emo-
negative affect for children: scale development and preliminary val-
tional, and behavioral programs: do they enhance students’
idation. Psychological Assessment, 11(3), 326–338. doi:10.1037
development in the area of skill, behavior, and adjustment?
/1040-3590.11.3.326.
Psychology in the Schools, 49(9), 892–909. doi:10.1002
Lawlor, M. S. (2016). Mindfulness and Social Emotional Learning /pits.21641.
(SEL): a conceptual framework. In K. Schonert-Reichl & R. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th
Roeser (Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness in education (pp. 65–80). ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3506-2_5. The Hawn Foundation. (2011). The MindUp curriculum: brain-focused
Lawlor, M. S., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Gadermann, A. M., & Zumbo, B. strategies for learning—and living. New York: Scholastic Inc.
D. (2013). A validation study of the mindful attention awareness Vaz, F., & Martins, C. (2008). Diferenciação e regulação emocional na
scale adapted for children. Mindfulness, 5(6), 730–741. idade adulta: Validação de dois instrumentos de avaliação do
doi:10.1007/s12671-013-0228-4. reportório e da capacidade de diferenciação e regulação emocional
Lyubomirsky, S., Boehm, J. K., Kasri, F., & Zehm, K. (2011). The cog- na idade adulta. In A. P. Noronha, C. Machado, L. S. Almeida, M.
nitive and hedonic costs of dwelling on achievement-related nega- Gonçalves, S. Martins, & V. Ramalho (Eds.), Actas da XIII
tive experiences: implications for enduring happiness and unhappi- Conferência Internacional Avaliação Psicológica: Formas e
ness. Emotion, 11(5), 1152–1167. doi:10.1037/a0025479. Contextos (para. 36; 12 págs). CD-ROM. Braga: Psiquilíbrios.
Maloney, J. E., Lawlor, M. S., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Whitehead, J. Weare, K. (2013). Developing mindfulness with children and young peo-
(2016). A mindfulness-based social and emotional learning curriculum ple: a review of the evidence and policy context. Journal of
for school-aged children: the MindUP program. In K. Schonert-Reichl Children’s Services, 8(2), 141–153. doi:10.1108/jcs-12-2012-0014.
& R. Roeser (Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness in education (pp. 313– Weare, K. (2014). Mindfulness in schools: where are we and where might
334). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3506-2_20. we go next? In A. Ie, C. T. Ngnoumen, & E. J. Langer (Eds.),
Marôco, J. (2014). Análise estatística com o SPSS Statistics—6ª edição. Handbook of mindfulness (pp. 1037–1053). Chichester: Wiley.
Pêro Pinheiro: Report Number. doi:10.1002/9781118294895.ch53.
Marques Pinto, A., Lima, M. L., & Lopes da Silva, A. (2005). Fuentes de Weare, K., & Nind, M. (2011). Mental health promotion and problem
estrés, burnout y estrategias de coping en professores portugueses. prevention in schools: what does the evidence say? Health
Revista de Psicologia del Trabajo y las Organizaciones, 21, 125–143. Promotion International, 26, 29–69. doi:10.1093/heapro/dar075.
 Mindfulness

Welford, M., & Langmead, K. (2015). Compassion-based initia- Zelazo, P. D., & Lyons, K. E. (2012). The potential benefits of mindful-
tives in educational settings. Educational and Child ness training in early childhood: a developmental social cognitive
Psychology, 32(1), 71–80. neuroscience perspective. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2),
Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2007). School-based interventions for 154–160.
aggressive and disruptive behavior update of a meta-analysis. Zoogman, S., Goldberg, S. B., Hoyt, W. T., & Miller, L. (2014).
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 33, 130–143. Mindfulness interventions with youth: a meta-analysis.
doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.04.011. Mindfulness, 6(2), 290–302. doi:10.1007/s12671-013-0260.