Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCrane, C
dc.contributor.authorGanguli, P
dc.contributor.authorBall, S
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, L
dc.contributor.authorBlakemore, S-J
dc.contributor.authorByford, S
dc.contributor.authorDalgleish, T
dc.contributor.authorFord, T
dc.contributor.authorGreenberg, M
dc.contributor.authorKuyken, W
dc.contributor.authorLord, L
dc.contributor.authorMontero-Marín, J
dc.contributor.authorSonley, A
dc.contributor.authorUkoumunne, OC
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, JMG
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-17T11:41:44Z
dc.date.issued2020-12-15
dc.description.abstractBackground: There is growing research support for the use of mindfulness training (MT) in schools, but almost no high-quality evidence about different training models for people wishing to teach mindfulness in this setting. Effective dissemination of MT relies on the development of scalable training routes. Objective: To compare four training routes for school teachers wishing to deliver MT differing in intensity and potential scalability, considering teaching competency, training acceptability and cost-effectiveness. Methods: Schools were randomised to an existing route comprising an eight-session instructor-led personal mindfulness course, combined with four-day MT program training, or one of three more scalable, lower-intensity, alternatives: an instructor-led personal mindfulness course combined with one-day MT program training; a selftaught personal mindfulness course (delivered through a course book) combined with four-day MT program training and a self-taught personal mindfulness course combined with one-day MT program training. Results: Attrition from training was substantial across all routes. The instructor-led course was more effective than the self-taught course in increasing teachers’ personal mindfulness skills. Even the most intensive (existing) training route brought only 29% of the teachers commencing training, and 56% of those completing the study protocol, to the required minimum competency threshold (an advanced beginner rating on an adapted version of the MBI-TAC). The differences in levels of competency achieved by existing training compared with the more scalable alternatives were modest, with economic evaluation suggesting that the existing route was both more expensive and more effective than lower intensity alternatives, but with no statistically significant differences between routes. Conclusions: This research questions the move towards abbreviating teacher training to increase scalability and suggests instead that many teachers require additional support to ensure competency from first delivery of MT in the classroom.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWellcome Trusten_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 15 December 2020en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/2164956120964738
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/122495
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen_GB
dc.subjectmindfulness-based programsen_GB
dc.subjectteaching competencyen_GB
dc.subjecteffectivenessen_GB
dc.subjectimplementation and disseminationen_GB
dc.subjecttrainingen_GB
dc.subjectacceptabilityen_GB
dc.titleTraining school teachers to deliver a mindfulness program: exploring scalability, acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectivenessen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2020-08-17T11:41:44Z
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalGlobal Advances in Health and Medicineen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dc.source.uri© The Author(s) 2020. Open access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-08-13
exeter.funder::Wellcome Trusten_GB
rioxxterms.versionvoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2020-08-13
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2020-08-14T22:06:18Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2021-01-14T15:23:05Z
refterms.panelAen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record