Mindfulness in the English Language Classroom: Student Perceptions of Positive Psychology Curriculum Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mindfulness has received increased attention recently in educational contexts as a tool helping students mitigate negative emotions, enhance resilience, reduce classroom anxiety, and improve academic performance. Although interventions that teach mindfulness principles have flourished in elementary school and university contexts, limited research has investigated the effects of interventions in educational contexts for English language learning. This study investigates student perceptions of the effectiveness of mindfulness interventions in an intensive English program for non-matriculated university students where teachers taught a 65-minute mindfulness lesson once a week for 13 weeks in addition to their normal English language curriculum. Six teachers and 107 English language learners participated. Teachers were given the flexibility to decide how best to incorporate the mindfulness interventions into their lessons. Survey and focus group data were collected. The qualitative comments were analyzed following a phenomenological approach to understand how students perceived their individual learning experiences. Students’ overall reaction to the mindfulness interventions was positive; they highlighted benefits to both their emotional toolbox and their classroom experience. Implications of this research incorporating mindfulness instruction into the ESL classroom are also included.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".