164 • ii: MindFulnESS in EduCATing FOR SElF-REgulATiOn And EngAgEMEnT
improving resilience to stress and cognitive performance. The authors noted that there were
several limitations to their study. First, Zenner et al. (2014) reported that the diversity of study
samples, variety in implementation and exercises, and wide range of instruments should be
explored with careful and discerned investigation of data. Second, Zenner et al. (2014) indicated
that they found great heterogeneity across studies with many studies underpowered. Last, the
authors also reflected on the challenging nature of researching mindfulness in a school setting.
Mindfulness interventions With Youth
Zoogman, Goldberg, Hoyt, and Miller (2015) conducted a meta-analysis on mindfulness
interventions on youth. This analysis included those studies done outside of the school set-
ting. Overall, they included 20 quantitative studies in the analyses. The age range was 6 to
21 years old. Three studies used MBSR, three used MBCT for children, five used one com-
ponent of MBSR, and nine used another type of mindfulness intervention (Zoogman et al.,
2015). Programs ranged from 4 to 24 weeks, with a majority of the programs running 8 to
12 weeks in length.
Overall, mindfulness interventions with youth were found to be helpful and not to carry
iatrogenic harm, with the primary omnibus effect size (del) in the small to moderate range (0.23,
p <.0001), indicating the superiority of mindfulness treatments over active control comparison
conditions (Zoogman et al., 2015). Of note, del is a measure of the difference in pre-/post-effect
sizes among groups (Zoogman et al., 2015). A significantly larger effect size was found on
psychological symptoms (e.g., anxiety and depression) compared to other dependent variable
types (0.37 vs. 0.21, p =.028), and for studies drawn from clinical samples compared to non-
clinical samples (0.50 vs. 0.20, p = .024). Mindfulness appears to be a promising intervention
modality for youth. Authors report that as of 2011, the majority of studies on mindfulness with
youth engage generally healthy participants recruited from schools (Zoogman et al., 2015).
Meditation interventions in Schools
In a review of meditation interventions in schools, Waters, Barsky, Ridd, and Allen (2015)
reviewed evidence from 15 peer-reviewed studies with respect to three student outcomes:
well-being, social competence, and academic achievement. The researchers calculated 76
effect sizes, with 1,797 participants. Overall, 61% of findings were statistically significant,
with 76% having small effects, 24% medium effects, and 9% large effects. The type of medita-
tion program mattered. Transcendental meditation programs (i.e., silently repeating a word
or mantra to achieve a meditative state, refocusing when distracted) had a higher percent-
age of significant effects than mindfulness-based and other types of meditation programs
(e.g., loving-kindness, Zen, Yoga Nidra; Waters et al., 2015). Program elements such as dura-
tion, frequency of practice and type of instructor influenced student outcomes (Waters et
al., 2015). Setting may also play a role. A conceptual model is put forward positing that
meditation positively influences student success by increasing cognitive functioning and by
increasing emotional regulation (Waters et al., 2015).
School Faculty and Staff
Weare (2013) describes the benefit of mindfulness implementation in schools for faculty
and staff. Given the requirement for those who teach mindfulness to be experienced and