Exploring the Experiences of Mindfulness-Based Teachers in Saskatchewan Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This basic interpretive qualitative study investigated the benefits of a mindfulness-based approach to teaching.Six participants were recruited for this study including one homeschooling educator, three elementary school teachers, one high school teacher, and one elementary school administrator.Semi-structured interviews were used to generate data in order to understand how mindfulness affects teachers in their personal and professional lives, and how they are using mindfulness to support students in their classrooms.As participants' stories were reviewed, four major themes were identified using a wellness model perspective (Myers & Sweeney, 2008): (1) Connecting to the curriculum: Mindfulness and its curriculum links; (2) Creating, coping, socializing, meaning making, and exercising: Mindfulness and its connections to teacher health and wellness; (3) Managing and supporting students: Mindfulness and its links to a caring classroom environment; and (4) Motivating, engaging, and meeting students' needs: Mindfulness and its benefits for students.The current study's findings have contributed to furthering research in the area of mindful education and health, and have several implications for both practice and future research in the area.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".