Early Education and Development

ISSN: 1040-9289 (Print) 1556-6935 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/heed20

Two-Year Impact of a Mindfulness-Based Program

on Preschoolers’ Self-Regulation and Academic
Performance

Karen L. Thierry, Heather L. Bryant, Sandra Speegle Nobles & Karen S. Norris

To cite this article: Karen L. Thierry, Heather L. Bryant, Sandra Speegle Nobles & Karen
S. Norris (2016) Two-Year Impact of a Mindfulness-Based Program on Preschoolers’ Self-
Regulation and Academic Performance, Early Education and Development, 27:6, 805-821, DOI:
10.1080/10409289.2016.1141616

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1141616

Published online: 26 Feb 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5126

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 23 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=heed20
EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
2016, VOL. 27, NO. 6, 805–821
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1141616

Two-Year Impact of a Mindfulness-Based Program on Preschoolers’

Self-Regulation and Academic Performance
Karen L. Thierrya, Heather L. Bryantb, Sandra Speegle Noblesc, and Karen S. Norrisc
a
Research and Evaluation, Momentous Institute; bInnovation and Impact, Momentous Institute; cEducation Programs,
Momentous Institute

ABSTRACT
Research Findings: Students experienced a mindfulness program designed
to enhance their self-regulation in prekindergarten and kindergarten. At the
end of the 1st year of the program, these students showed improvements
in teacher-reported executive function skills, specifically related to working
memory and planning and organizing, whereas students in a business as
usual control group showed a decline in these areas. No difference between
the groups’ receptive vocabulary was found in prekindergarten. At the end
of kindergarten, the mindfulness group had higher vocabulary and reading
scores than the business as usual group. Practice or Policy: These findings
suggest that mindfulness practices may be a promising technique that
teachers can use in early childhood settings to enhance preschoolers’
executive functioning, with academic benefits emerging in the kindergarten
year.

The ability to control emotions, thoughts, and behaviors is critical for success in school and in life.
Self-regulation in early childhood predicts preacademic skills in prekindergarten and reading and
math test scores into elementary and secondary school (Blair & Razza, 2007; Claessens & Dowsett,
2014; Eigsti et al., 2006; McClelland et al., 2007; Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989; Ponitz,
McClelland, Matthews, & Morrison, 2009; Raver et al., 2011). Moffitt et al. (2011) found that self-
control, as measured by parent-, teacher-, and self-report ratings during the first 10 years of
children’s lives, was a positive predictor of many outcomes in adulthood, including income, financial
security, physical and mental health, and lack of criminal convictions. Children who are better able
to regulate their emotions, cognition, and behavior are more engaged in the classroom and have
more opportunities for learning with peers and teachers compared to children who are less able to
regulate themselves (Arnold et al., 2006; Raver, Garner, & Smith-Donald, 2007). Given its impor-
tance, it is critical to understand how self-regulation can be nurtured in young children. A number
of studies have begun to examine this issue (Diamond & Lee, 2011). One promising technique
shown to be effective with adults and older children is based on the construct of mindfulness.
This study focused on a prekindergarten program that emphasizes mindful awareness, or mind-
fulness, defined as a state of consciousness in which one is aware and attentive to the present
moment (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Kabat-Zinn, 1994). Mindfulness can be developed via practices that
require one to sustain one’s focus of attention on particular objects (e.g., the breath) or mental
contents (e.g., family members, friends). Other variations involve paying attention to moment-to-
moment fluctuations in one’s mind (i.e., the stream of consciousness) as a way to further develop the
ability to concentrate and manage stress and emotions. These practices thus center around medita-
tion exercises involving deep breathing and attention to one’s senses. Research suggests that at least

CONTACT Karen L. Thierry kthierry@momentousinstitute.org Research and Evaluation, Momentous Institute, 106 East
Tenth Street, Dallas, TX 75225.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/heed.
© 2016 Momentous Institute
806 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

in adults, such practices enhance the ability to regulate emotions, thoughts, and behaviors (Higgins,
1996; Jha, Krompinger, & Baime, 2007; Marcus et al., 2003; Ortner, Kilner, & Zelazo, 2007; Ramel,
Goldin, Carmona, & McQuaid, 2004; Segal, Williams, & Teasdale, 2002; Tang et al., 2007).
Most of the research examining the efficacy of mindfulness practices involves clinical studies
conducted with adults. Many of these studies focused on a specific treatment program known as
mindfulness-based stress reduction training (Kabat-Zinn, 1982, 2003). Adults who received mind-
fulness-based stress reduction training for a period of time (e.g., 8 weeks) experienced greater
improvements in their physical and psychological health (e.g., lessening of chronic pain, anxiety,
depression) than those in control groups (Arias, Steinberg, Banga, & Trestan, 2006; Baer, 2003;
Grossman, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004; Witek-Janusek et al., 2008). Direct mechanisms for
these practices involve both neurological and cognitive explanations. From a neurological perspec-
tive, these improvements in health may be a result of the strengthening of neural systems that
support emotional, cognitive, and behavioral regulation, specifically increased activation of prefron-
tal cortical regions of the brain (Creswell, Way, Eisenberger, & Lieberman, 2007; Farb et al., 2007;
Lutz et al., 2009; Singer & Lamm, 2009; Slagter et al., 2007).
In particular, Zelazo and Lyons (2012) suggested that mindfulness practices may engage both top-
down cognitive self-regulatory processes, known as executive functions and linked with prefrontal
cortical development, and bottom-up processes associated with arousal and anxiety that are linked
with subcortical regions of the brain (e.g., the amygdala). That is, as individuals focus their attention
on moment-to-moment experiences (e.g., noticing their breath) and are reminded to bring their
attention back to those particular experiences when their mind wanders, they are practicing the kind
of sustained attention required for executive function, which are those mental functions that enable
the control of thoughts, behaviors, and emotions. Diamond (2013, 2014) identified three core
executive functions: (a) inhibitory control (resisting habits, temptations, or distractions), (b) working
memory (mentally holding and using information), and (c) cognitive flexibility (adjusting to
change). These components should be engaged during mindfulness practices. For instance, focusing
attention on the breath requires one to inhibit interference from environmental distractors.
Following instructions to shift attention to specific thoughts or particular sounds in the room
requires cognitive flexibility. Holding in mind the information to which one is attending requires
working memory. With these core executive functions as a foundation, one can then engage in
higher order thinking, such as reasoning, problem solving, and planning (Diamond, 2014).
Furthermore, the encouragement to be nonjudgmental of one’s mental wanderings may calm
bottom-up processes (e.g., emotional/stress arousal) that often interfere with sustained attention
and reflection (Zelazo & Lyons, 2012).
Given the positive findings with adults, many practitioners and researchers have suggested that
mindfulness practices could be beneficial in educational settings (Davidson et al., 2012; Zelazo &
Lyons, 2012). And in fact, mindfulness programs have been adapted for use with children and
adolescents in elementary and secondary schools (Kaiser-Greenland, 2010; Saltzman & Goldin,
2008). For instance, one mindfulness program, known as mindful awareness practices, has a
curriculum for students in prekindergarten through eighth grade. In this 8-week program, children
participate in games, activities, and instruction designed to enhance their awareness of their own
thoughts and emotions along with training in the awareness of external sources (e.g., other people,
the environment). At the start and end of each session, instructors guide students through a brief
period of meditation. As students are sitting in a group, they engage in a breath awareness practice
(about 3 min in length) in which they are told to focus on the physical sensation of breathing.
During this activity, they sit comfortably in a circle and might be told to focus their eyes on an object
placed in the center of the circle (e.g., a stuffed toy or drum), or they could keep their eyes closed.
During the practice, the students are asked to pay attention to their breath. For instance, as they are
breathing in, they might be told to think of where in their body they feel their breath (e.g., nose,
chest, belly). In between the meditation periods, the instructor facilitates games and activities with
students to promote their internal and external awareness. For instance, to promote their awareness
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 807

of their senses, students might engage in mindful tasting in which they eat different foods purpose-
fully to notice different tastes (e.g., sweet, salty, sour). The activities typically take place twice a week
in 30-min sessions.
Some studies have examined the effectiveness of these programs in schools, with most focusing on
students beyond prekindergarten. For instance, Flook et al. (2010) examined the impact of a mind-
fulness practices program on second and third graders’ executive function skills. Teachers and
parents reported on the students’ executive function prior to the start of the program and again at
the end of the 8-week period. Flook et al. (2010) found that the program affected only those children
with higher levels of dysregulation prior to the start of the program. Children in the mindful
practices group who were less regulated showed greater improvement in executive functions over
the 8-week period than did less regulated children in the control group. Another study examined the
impact of a similar mindfulness program (i.e., the Attention Academy Program) on first- to third-
grade students’ attentional skills (Napoli, Krech, & Holley, 2005). After 24 weeks of the program
(involving a total of 12 sessions, 45 min each), students in the mindfulness training group showed
greater improvements in their attention (based on teacher reports and selective attention assess-
ments) than those in a control group.
Another mindfulness program with curricula for prekindergarten students is MindUP (cover-
ing up to eighth grade). Like other mindfulness programs, the MindUP curriculum centers
around breathing practices and mindful awareness practices (e.g., mindful seeing, mindful eat-
ing). The MindUP program is also similar to other mindfulness programs adapted for children in
that it includes some extension of these more self-focused practices to other-focused practices.
For instance, the curriculum includes lessons on perspective taking and acts of kindness to help
develop students’ awareness of others and prosociality. However, these lessons make up a smaller
portion of the curriculum. A unique aspect of MindUP is the inclusion of introductory lessons
that teach students about primary parts of their brain (e.g., the amygdala and the prefrontal
cortex) and the roles these parts play in their emotions and cognition. The developers’ rationale
for including lessons on the brain is that it provides students with information about what
happens in their brain when they are, for instance, upset or angry versus content and relaxed.
The curriculum then connects that knowledge of the brain with breathing practices as a strategy
to help students focus their attention and calm themselves when needed. Studies of other types of
interventions with children, in fact, have shown that students benefit from background knowl-
edge regarding why and/or how strategies can help them (Schneider & Pressley, 1989). Two
studies to date have examined the effectiveness of this program, but with fourth- through eighth-
grade students only. Students participating in the program at these grade levels exhibited greater
levels of social competence and self-regulation compared to students in control conditions
(Schonert-Reichl & Lawlor, 2010; Schonert-Reichl et al., 2015).
Executive functions undergo the most rapid development during the preschool period (Zelazo,
Carlson, & Kesek, 2008). Thus, mindfulness training might be especially beneficial to prekindergar-
ten students. However, only one study to date has examined the impact of a mindfulness program on
preschoolers’ self-regulation skills (Flook, Goldberg, Pinger, & Davidson, 2015). In Flook et al.’s
(2015) study, prekindergarten students experienced a 12-week program consisting of mindfulness
practices along with books and songs to cultivate kindness and compassion. At the end of the
program, students in the mindfulness group showed greater improvements in their teacher-reported
social competence (prosocial behaviors, which were indicators of kindness and compassion, and
emotional regulation), and they also received higher report card grades at the end of the school year
than students in a control group. However, no direct impact on other executive functions (working
memory, cognitive flexibility, planning/organizing) was found, which is somewhat surprising given
that executive functions are core cognitive processes thought to be directly impacted by mindfulness
practices (Zelazo & Lyons, 2012). The effect on social competence was moderated by children’s
baseline levels of executive function, such that students who started out with lower levels of executive
808 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

functioning at baseline showed greater improvements in social competence relative to students in the
control group.
In the current study, we examined the impact of the MindUP program on prekindergarten
students’ executive function and language skills. We used a quasi-experimental design, in which
one cohort of students served as the intervention group, experiencing the MindUP program in
their prekindergarten and kindergarten years, and a previous-year cohort of students (at the same
school) served as a business as usual (BAU) control group. We thus also examined long-term
impact of the program by following the two cohorts of students through kindergarten. Students
in the MindUP group received the full curriculum over the course of their prekindergarten year
with follow-up of core practices in their kindergarten year. No extant study, with children of any
age, has examined the impact of a mindfulness program beyond the first year of its
implementation.
We predicted that students in the mindfulness group would evidence greater improvements in
their executive function skills, as reported by their teachers, compared to students in the BAU
group. Given the research showing positive links between executive function skills and perfor-
mance on language and literacy assessments (Blair & Razza, 2007; Claessens & Dowsett, 2014;
Eigsti et al., 2006; McClelland et al., 2007; Ponitz et al., 2009; Raver et al., 2011), we also
predicted that students in the mindfulness group would evidence greater improvements in their
language skills during their prekindergarten year and higher scores on a literacy assessment at the
end of their kindergarten year.

Method
Participants and design
Children
The study included 47 students attending an urban elementary school located in a large-size city in
the southwestern region of the United States. (A total of 48 students were enrolled, but we received
parental consent for 47 of the 48 students, or 98%). One cohort of students (n = 23; M age = 4.56 years,
SD = 0.33) experienced the mindfulness program in prekindergarten and kindergarten (i.e., the
MindUP group). A previous-year cohort of students (n = 24; M age = 4.54 years, SD = 0.27) did not
experience the program over the course of their prekindergarten and kindergarten years and served
as a control group (i.e., the BAU group). Table 1 shows demographic characteristics of the two
groups when they were in prekindergarten. The groups did not differ significantly on any of the
variables. Gender was approximately evenly distributed within each group. The majority of students
in each cohort were Hispanic (85% overall) and economically disadvantaged (72% qualified for free
or reduced-price lunch). The average family income was also similar for each group of students
(MMindUP = $34,416 and MBAU = $31,320).
About half of the families within each group indicated Spanish as the primary language spoken at
home. However, all of the students began attending the school, which used an English immersion
approach, when they were 3 years of age (1 year prior to their prekindergarten year). Based on
English language assessments conducted at the beginning of the students’ prekindergarten year, most
students from Spanish-speaking families within each group had standard scores that were within the
norm for expressive (MMindUP = 91.10, SD = 16.90; MBAU = 93.08, SD = 17.63) and receptive
(MMindUP = 92.70, SD = 13.70; MBAU = 92.17, SD = 13.97) English language. For the majority of
families within each group, the highest degree earned was a high school diploma, with mothers
indicating higher levels of education than fathers (see Table 1). Both cohorts of students were
followed through their kindergarten year at the same school. When the students entered kindergar-
ten, one male student from the BAU group and two female students from the MindUP group
withdrew from the school. The same prekindergarten (n = 2) and kindergarten (n = 2) teachers
instructed both cohorts of students.
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 809

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics by Group.

Variable MindUP Business as Usual Total
Participants (n) 23 24 47
Age (years)
M 4.56 4.54 4.55
SD 0.33 0.27 0.30
Gender
Male 48% 54% 51%
Female 52% 46% 49%
Ethnicity/race
Hispanic 87% 84% 85%
African American 9% 8% 9%
White 4% 8% 6%
Family language
Spanish 52% 50% 51%
English 44% 42% 43%
English/Spanish 4% 8% 6%
Parent education (highest obtained)
Mothers
High school diploma 83% 92% 87%
Some high school 17% 8% 13%
Fathers
High school diploma 69% 67% 68%
Some high school 31% 33% 32%

Teachers
The prekindergarten and kindergarten teachers (N = 4) received the same level of professional
development from the school with respect to both academic instruction and promoting students’
social and emotional competencies. The two prekindergarten teachers had 6 and 15 years of teaching
experience at the time they taught the BAU group; the two kindergarten teachers had 6 and 40 years
of teaching experience at the time they taught the BAU group.

Procedure
The study was completed over a period of 3 years. In the first year, students in the BAU group
experienced the BAU curriculum (see description in “BAU Practices”) in their prekindergarten year.
Toward the end of this first year, prekindergarten and kindergarten teachers received a full day of
training on the MindUP curriculum. In the second year, in addition to receiving the BAU curricu-
lum, students in the MindUP group experienced the year-long MindUP curriculum (see description
in “Mindfulness Curriculum”) during their prekindergarten year while students in the BAU group
received the usual curriculum in their kindergarten year. In the third year, students in the MindUP
group continued to use the core breathing practices throughout their kindergarten year. When both
groups of students were in prekindergarten, their teacher and parents completed an executive
functioning assessment, the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF; see descrip-
tion in “Outcome Measures”) for each student at the beginning and end of the school year. Both
groups of students were also given an English vocabulary assessment, the Peabody Picture
Vocabulary Test (PPVT; see description in “Outcome Measures”), at the beginning and end of
their prekindergarten year. At the end of the students’ kindergarten year, they were administered
Istation’s Indicators of Progress (ISIP) Early Reading Assessment (see description in “Outcome
Measures”).

Mindfulness curriculum
The curriculum used was based on the MindUP program, which consists of 15 mindfulness-based
lessons, approximately 20–30 min each (see the Appendix for lessons and objectives). The lessons
were taught over the course of the school year, so teachers could spend 2 to 3 weeks on the concepts
810 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

covered in the lesson. In addition, three times each day, students engaged in a core mindfulness
practice, that of deep breathing with a focus on a single resonant sound (e.g., the sound of a chime
rung by the teacher at the start of the practice). During the first few weeks, the practice lasted about
30 s, and as children gained experience with it, the practice was extended to approximately 60 s. The
majority of the curriculum (Lessons 1–9) focused on building students’ self-regulation and self-
awareness skills. For instance, one lesson provided students with information about the primary
parts of the brain involved in emotional regulation, attention, and learning (i.e., the amygdala,
hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex). The goal of this lesson was to help students understand how
their minds work and how their thoughts and feelings affect different parts of their brain and their
behavior. Subsequent lessons directly taught students how to focus their attention, in particular,
using their senses more mindfully (i.e., mindful listening, seeing, eating). The other portion of the
curriculum (Lessons 10–15) targeted students’ relationship skills and included lessons on perspective
taking, optimism, and gratitude.
Prekindergarten and kindergarten teachers (N = 4) received one full day of training on the
mindfulness curriculum (conducted by the developers of MindUP). Kindergarten teachers received
the training also so that when students in the MindUP group progressed to their class in the
following year, they were able to continue to use the core breathing practices with these students
throughout their kindergarten year.

BAU practices
Students in a previous-year cohort received the support for self-regulation provided by teachers prior
to the introduction of the MindUP curriculum. This support included an organized classroom
environment, including rules and routines with clear behavior expectations, positive teacher–student
relationships (positive affect, respectful behavior), and proactive management of behavior (e.g.,
anticipating problem behaviors and planning appropriately). Teachers focused on drawing attention
to positive classroom behaviors (e.g., following directions, paying attention) rather than negative
classroom behaviors. The BAU support also included activities to promote students’ understanding
of feelings and emotions and books to engage children’s perspective-taking skills. In sum, the
primary component of the MindUP curriculum that was absent from the BAU support was the
use of mindfulness practices.

Implementation measures
To monitor implementation of the MindUP program, teachers completed surveys that asked them to
indicate whether they delivered each of the 15 lessons to their students. In addition, for each lesson,
the teachers indicated the level of student engagement using a scale ranging from 1 to 5, with 1
indicating not engaged and 5 indicating very engaged. Finally, for each week, teachers indicated
whether they engaged in the breathing practices as prescribed (i.e., three times a day).

Outcome measures
Executive function
At the beginning and end of prekindergarten, teachers and parents completed a normative assess-
ment of executive functioning, the BRIEF for Preschoolers (BRIEF-P; Gioia, Espy, & Isquith, 2002),
for each student (100% completion rate for both teachers and parents). Parents whose primary
language was Spanish were provided with Spanish forms of the assessment. The BRIEF-P consists of
63 items for which teachers and parents rated the extent to which a behavior had been a problem for
the student. Each behavior was rated using a 3-point scale, with 1 indicating that the behavior never
occurred, 2 indicating sometimes, and 3 indicating often. Five scales composing this assessment were
the focus of this study: inhibit, consisting of 16 items (e.g., “is impulsive”); emotional control,
consisting of 10 items (e.g., “becomes upset too easily”); shift, consisting of 10 items (e.g., “is upset
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 811

by change in plans or routines”); working memory, consisting of 17 items (e.g., “has trouble
remembering something, even after a brief period of time”); and planning/organizing, consisting
of 10 items (e.g., “has trouble carrying out the actions needed to complete tasks”). Higher scores on
each scale indicated greater levels of dysregulation; thus, the lower the score, the better the executive
function. Gioia et al. (2002) reported high levels of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas) for the
five subscales (range = .80–.95 for the parent version, and range = .90–.97 for the teacher version).
The BRIEF-P scales correlate positively with other measures of behavior and attentional functioning,
including the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000) and the Behavior Assessment
System for Children (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 1992).

Receptive vocabulary
At the beginning and end of prekindergarten, all students were given the PPVT-4 (Dunn & Dunn,
2007), which is a test of English receptive vocabulary that is highly correlated with full-scale
measures of verbal intelligence (Carvajal, Parks, Logan, & Page, 1992; Hodapp, 1993). Dunn and
Dunn (2007) reported internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas) of .97 and .96 for the two forms of
the assessment. During school time, a research assistant asked each student whether he or she would
like to play a “picture game.” She then escorted the child to a quiet room, where she administered the
PPVT-4. She sat across the child at a table, read aloud a word, and asked the child to point to one of
four pictures that best illustrated the word. The assessment was stopped when the child reached an
error rate of 75% on the past 12 words, per PPVT-4 administration instructions.

Literacy and vocabulary skills

At the end of kindergarten, students in each group took a computer-based assessment of their
reading skills (in English), the ISIP Early Reading Assessment (Mathes, Torgeson, & Herron, 2011),
which measured their vocabulary, phonemic awareness, letter knowledge, alphabetic decoding, and
listening comprehension. The ISIP Early Reading Assessment has strong to very strong criterion
validity with other assessments, including the Test of Preschool Early Literacy and the PPVT-4
(Mathes et al., 2011). Internal consistency, based on marginal reliability, was reported as high
(average = .90 for subtest and overall reading scores). The items on the assessment align with the
state-specific standards on which the teachers based their reading curriculum. The assessment took
about 30 min for each student to complete. Students received a total score on the assessment along
with separate scores for each of the five areas assessed.

Results
Gender and family language were included in preliminary analyses with all dependent measures
(with the exception of the implementation measures). For the three students whose family language
was both English and Spanish, an examination of their beginning-of-year English vocabulary scores
(PPVT-4) indicated that they were most similar to students in the English group, so these three
students were included in this group. No effects of gender were found, and all analyses were
therefore collapsed across this factor. However, for teacher BRIEF-P scores, family language was a
borderline significant factor, so analyses with this outcome measure included this variable. In all
analyses, an alpha level of .05 was used, and when appropriate, effect sizes were calculated using
Cohen’s d, where an effect size of .20 is considered small, .50 is considered medium, and .80 is
considered large (Cohen, 1988).

Implementation of the MindUP program

Teachers’ responses to each component of the implementation surveys are presented next. Both
prekindergarten teachers indicated covering all 15 lessons over the course of the school year.
Prekindergarten teachers also rated the level of student engagement during each lesson using a
812 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

scale from 1 to 5. Both teachers indicated high levels of engagement, as indicated by their average
scores across the 15 lessons (Teacher 1: M = 4.47, Teacher 2: M = 4.67). The prekindergarten
teachers also indicated doing the daily breathing practices on a consistent basis, that is, at least two to
three times a day. The kindergarten teachers continued this portion of the program with students in
the MindUP group, and they also indicated consistent implementation of the breathing practices (at
least two to three times a day).

Baseline comparisons
The MindUP and BAU groups’ beginning-of-year scores on the executive function (BRIEF-P)
and language (PPVT-4) measures were compared to ensure that no preexisting differences existed
between the two groups of children. Teacher and parent BRIEF-P raw scores on each scale were
converted to t scores (M = 50, SD = 15). Higher t scores indicate more dysregulated executive
functions, and lower scores indicate more regulated executive functions. Beginning-of-year
parent and teacher BRIEF-P scores were entered into separate multivariate analyses of variance
(MANOVAs) with group (MindUP vs. BAU) as a between-subjects variable and BRIEF-P t score
(inhibit, emotional control, shift, working memory, and plan/organize) as a multivariate factor.
No effect of group or interaction with group was found for either the teacher- or parent-report
measures. Thus, both groups had similar executive function skills at the start of their prekinder-
garten year (see Table 2). Beginning-of-year raw scores on the PPVT-4 were entered into a
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with group as the independent variable. No difference
between the MindUP (M = 63.63, SD = 18.51) and BAU (M = 62.87, SD = 21.63) groups’ scores
was found.

Changes in executive function and academic performance

Executive function
Pretest and posttest teacher BRIEF-P t scores (beginning and end of the prekindergarten year) were
entered into a MANOVA, with group (MindUP vs. BAU) and family language (Spanish vs. English
only or English/Spanish) as between-subjects factors and scale t score (inhibit, emotional control,
shift, working memory, plan/organize) and time (pre vs. post) as multivariate factors. Pre and post
parent BRIEF-P t scores were entered into a MANOVA also but with family language excluded given
that preliminary analyses indicated no interaction of this variable with the parent BRIEF-P scores.
For the teacher reports, a main effect of scale score and a Group × Time interaction were
qualified by a Group × Scale Score × Time interaction along with a borderline Group × Family
Language × Scale Score × Time interaction: scale score, F(4, 40) = 24.04, p < .01; Group × Time
interaction, F(1, 43) = 12.38, p < .01; Group × Scale Score × Time interaction, F(4, 40) = 3.90,

Table 2. Mean (SD) Baseline Scores on Teacher and Parent Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function for Preschoolers Scales.
Scale MindUP Business as Usual Total
Teacher report
Inhibit 51.78 (9.21) 51.08 (9.37) 51.43 (9.20)
Shift 46.39 (8.66) 46.25 (6.47) 46.32 (7.54)
Emotional control 46.43 (8.21) 48.83 (9.92) 47.66 (9.10)
Working memory 50.96 (9.28) 51.04 (6.50) 51.00 (7.89)
Plan/organize 49.22 (10.17) 50.38 (10.35) 49.81 (10.17)
Parent report
Inhibit 46.83 (7.93) 44.63 (12.54) 45.70 (10.48)
Shift 46.13 (9.32) 45.67 (7.53) 45.89 (8.37)
Emotional control 46.13 (8.36) 49.13 (10.85) 47.66 (9.73)
Working memory 48.78 (10.94) 47.58 (8.65) 48.17 (9.75)
Plan/organize 48.04 (10.34) 46.71 (10.58) 47.36 (10.37)
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 813

p < .01; Group × Family Language × Scale Score × Time interaction, F(4, 40) = 2.56, p = .06. To
analyze the significant three-way interaction, we ran separate Group × Time ANOVAs on each
BRIEF-P scale score. For inhibit, shift, and emotional control scores, no effects were found. For
working memory scores, a main effect of group was qualified by a Group × Time interaction:
group, F(1, 45) = 4.01, p = .05; Group × Time interaction, F(1, 45) = 15.10, p < .01. Likewise, for
plan/organize scores, a main effect of group was qualified by a Group × Time interaction: group,
F(1, 45) = 5.63, p < .05; Group × Time interaction, F(1, 45) = 14.61, p < .01. Simple effects
analyses examining between-group differences indicated no difference between the groups’
working memory and plan/organize scores at pretest. However, at posttest, students in the
MindUP group (M = 48.04, SD = 5.24) had lower working memory scores (i.e., higher levels
of regulation) than those in the BAU group (M = 56.58, SD = 10.80), F(1, 45) = 11.73, p < .01,
d = −1.02. Likewise, students in the MindUP group (M = 44.17, SD = 5.36) had lower posttest
plan/organize scores than those in the BAU group (M = 55.42, SD = 12.65), F(1, 45) = 15.49,
p < .01, d = −1.17. Simple effects analyses examining within-group differences indicated a
tendency for the MindUP group’s working memory to improve (i.e., decrease in scores) from
pre- to posttest, F(1, 22) = 3.86, p = .06, d = –0.41. An improvement in the MindUP group’s
planning/organizing was also found, F(1, 22) = 6.70, p < .05, d = –0.54 (see Figure 1). The BAU
group’s working memory and plan/organize scores increased from pre- to posttest, indicating
lowered levels of regulation in these areas: working memory, F(1, 23) = 12.20, p < .01, d = 0.71;
plan/organize, F(1, 23) = 7.98, p < .05, d = 0.58 (see Figure 1). It is interesting that an
examination of the means for the BAU group by family language suggested lowered levels of
regulation in working memory and plan/organize behaviors for students whose family language
was Spanish (n = 12) but not for those whose family language was English (n = 10), whose
scores were similar at the beginning and end of the year.
For the parent reports, no main effects or interactions were found. However, an examination of
the within-group means for each group indicated similar patterns of findings for the MindUP group
in the areas of working memory and plan/organize. The effect sizes were within the medium range
(d = –0.36 for working memory and d = –0.37 for plan/organize), suggesting improved regulation for
the MindUP group’s working memory (pre: Mchange = −5.04, SD = 13.84) and plan/organize (pre:
Mchange = −4.83, SD = 12.94) scale scores. The decline in regulation skills reported by teachers for
students in the BAU group was not supported by the parent reports.

MindUP BAU

8
** *
Change in Teacher BREIF–P score

6
4
2
0
–2
–4
*
–6
–8
*
BRIEF–P Scale

Figure 1. Change in teacher BRIEF-P scale scores (pre- to posttest) for MindUP and BAU groups (negative change scores = improved
executive functions). BRIEF-P = Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function for Preschoolers; BAU = business as usual.
814 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

Receptive vocabulary
PPVT-4 raw scores at the beginning and end of prekindergarten were entered into a mixed ANOVA,
with group as the independent variable and time (beginning vs. end of year) as the repeated measure.
Only a main effect of time was found, F(1, 45) = 239.96, p < .01. Both groups’ PPVT scores increased
from the beginning to the end of the year (pre: M = 63.26, SD = 19.88; post: M = 90.60, SD = 16.17).
No difference between the groups’ end-of-year vocabulary scores was indicated (MindUP group:
M = 90.58, SD = 18.85; BAU group: M = 90.61, SD = 13.23).

Vocabulary and literacy skills at the end of kindergarten

Total scores on the end-of-year ISIP kindergarten reading assessment were entered into an inde-
pendent-samples t test. Students in the MindUP group (M = 209.14, SD = 7.95) had a higher total
score than those in the control group (M = 201.00, SD = 10.00), t(42) = 2.97, p < .01, d = 0.93.
Vocabulary is a component of the ISIP assessment. Because vocabulary was the academic measure
used at prekindergarten, scores on this component of the ISIP were also entered into an indepen-
dent-samples t test. ISIP vocabulary scores were in fact positively correlated with PPVT-4 scores at
the end of prekindergarten, r(44) = .30, p < .05. Consistent with the ISIP total score, students in the
MindUP group (M = 216.96, SD = 11.92) had higher vocabulary scores than students in the control
group (M = 199.48, SD = 12.63), t(42) = 4.71, p < .01, d = 1.46.

Discussion
The mindfulness program had a positive impact on preschoolers’ executive function skills, as
reported by their teachers. In particular, students in the MindUP group improved from the begin-
ning to the end of the year on the working memory and plan/organize scales of the BRIEF-P. These
measures included such behaviors as “has trouble remembering something, even after a brief period
of time” and “has a short attention span.” Some of the plan/organize behaviors included “has trouble
getting started on activities or tasks even after instructed” and “when instructed to clean up, puts
things away in a disorganized, random way.” The working memory and plan/organize scales differ
from the other three scales in that they focus on the more cognitive components of self-regulation
(Gioia et al., 2002). The inhibit, emotional control, and shift scales are identified as more behavioral
forms of self-regulation. The mindfulness practices thus appeared to be more effective for these
cognitive forms of self-regulation, that is, getting students to remember instructions (perhaps
because their attention is more focused) and planning out activities in a goal-directed, organized
manner. Although the parent BRIEF-P reports did not show significant shifts, the pattern of means
for the MindUP group’s working memory and plan/organize scale scores aligned with that found for
the teacher reports. These findings are consistent with studies suggesting that inhibitory/emotional
control develops earlier than other forms of executive function (Caughy, Mills, Owen, & Hurst, 2013;
Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008); as a result, perhaps the mindfulness practices were most beneficial
for the later developing executive functions (i.e., working memory and planning/organizing).
It is interesting that teacher reports indicated that students in the BAU group declined in both
working memory and planning/organizing over the course of their prekindergarten year. One
hypothesis for this finding is that students who are in the early years of learning a second language
(who made up about half the sample) experience greater information processing demands, which
can, in the short term, negatively impact working memory and in turn planning and organizational
skills (Ardila, 2003; Linck, Osthus, Koeth, & Bunting, 2014). Family language appeared to be a
contributing factor in the decline in working memory and planning/organizing skills for students in
the BAU group. An examination of BRIEF-P scores by students’ family language indicated an
increase in working memory and plan/organize scores only for those students in the BAU group
who were learning English as a second language, not for students in the BAU group who were mostly
monolingual English-speaking students. These findings have particularly interesting implications,
suggesting that mindfulness practices could potentially help with the processing demands that young
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 815

children experience when learning a second language. Future studies with larger sample sizes should
further explore this important issue.
In the only other known study to date to have examined the impact of a mindfulness program on
prekindergarten students’ self-regulation and academic skills, Flook et al. (2015) found that students
with exposure to a mindfulness-based kindness curriculum showed greater improvements in social
competence, including prosocial behavior and emotional regulation, and had higher report card
grades at the end of the year. In that study, executive functions were measured using three
performance-based student assessments. One was a delay of gratification task in which students
had to resist a smaller reward that they could receive now in favor of a larger reward that they could
receive later. This task is thought to target emotion-related self-regulation, or effortful control
(Smith-Donald, Raver, Hayes, & Richardson, 2007), and most likely corresponds to the emotional
control items on the BRIEF-P. The other two assessments targeted a combination of executive
function processes, including inhibitory control, the ability to shift from one aspect of a task to
another (i.e., cognitive flexibility), and working memory skills. Flook et al. (2015) found no direct
impact of the mindfulness curriculum on any of these measures of executive function. They did,
however, find that students who scored at the lowest levels on the executive function measures
exhibited the largest improvements in teacher-reported social competence. One difference between
the current study and Flook et al. (2015) is that the current study included predominantly low-
income Hispanic students, whereas the students in Flook et al.’s (2015) study were predominantly
White and not economically disadvantaged. It may be that mindfulness programs will impact
students from varying backgrounds differently. In particular, students from low-income families
tend to exhibit poorer executive functions (Hackman & Farah, 2008), so perhaps children in the
current study were more readily impacted by the mindfulness practices.
In the present study, all students showed comparable growth in their receptive English vocabulary
over their prekindergarten year, as indicated by both groups’ increase in PPVT-4 scores from the
beginning to the end of the year. However, with continued exposure to the core breathing practices
in kindergarten, students in the MindUP group had higher overall scores and vocabulary scores on
their end-of-year kindergarten literacy assessment. In Flook et al.’s (2015) study, students in the
mindfulness group had higher report card grades at the end of their prekindergarten year than those
in the control group, but only for those indicators reflecting social-emotional skills, health, and
approaches to learning (e.g., persisting with activities). No difference between the groups was found
for language and cognition skills. These findings were thus consistent with the lack of prekinder-
garten language differences found in the current study. The current study showed long-term benefits
with continued experience with mindfulness practices, as indicated by the MindUP group’s higher
literacy and vocabulary scores at the end of kindergarten compared to students in the BAU group.
Although no baseline assessments of literacy were available in kindergarten, the students’ scores on
the vocabulary component of the literacy assessment were positively correlated with their PPVT-4
scores in prekindergarten. In Flook et al.’s (2015) study, the children were not followed beyond
prekindergarten.
With respect to the specific program examined (i.e., MindUP), the current study is the first to
evaluate the program’s impact on young children. All previous studies of the efficacy of MindUP
have included students in Grades 4 and up (Schonert-Reichl & Lawlor, 2010; Schonert-Reichl et al.,
2015). In those studies, students receiving the MindUP curriculum showed greater improvements in
social and emotional competencies (e.g., empathy, emotional control, optimism, prosocial behaviors)
than those in control groups. No impact on academic performance was found. However, in both
studies, impact was examined over the course of only one academic year. Again, perhaps academic
improvements are not evident until students have more continuous exposure to the mindfulness
practices.
The results of the present study contribute to a growing body of research showing that mind-
fulness practices can enhance children’s social-emotional competence and/or self-regulation. Some
weaknesses of the study include the lack of randomization of students to the MindUP and control
816 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

conditions and the possibility of preexisting differences between the MindUP and BAU cohorts.
Because this program was integrated into a school setting with only two prekindergarten teachers, it
would have been difficult to provide training to one prekindergarten teacher and not the other.
Future studies might include more schools so that the intervention could be assigned randomly at
the classroom or school level. Nevertheless, because the curriculum was used with all teachers, it may
have allowed for more effective implementation. That is, teachers often work with their grade-level
partners in a supportive fashion, so providing both teachers with access to the curriculum likely
contributed to the high level to which the teachers adhered to the curriculum. Observations of the
teachers’ fidelity of curriculum completion were not included in this study. If the curriculum is
implemented in a larger number of schools, fidelity observations should be conducted. An additional
weakness is the use of a teacher-report measure of executive functioning in prekindergarten.
Although parents also completed the measure, significant differences emerged from only the
teachers’ reports. Because teachers were also the implementers of the curriculum, they could have
been biased in their reporting of students’ behaviors. Future studies might also include performance-
based assessments of executive functioning (e.g., Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007). The
finding that students improved on a performance-based literacy assessment suggests that the
curriculum positively impacted the students.
The mindfulness program used in the current study should also be placed in the context of
other programs designed to enhance students’ self-regulation and social-emotional skills. These
programs have come to be termed social-emotional learning programs to emphasize their focus on
skills outside the core academic areas of reading, writing, and math (Denham & Brown, 2010;
Weissberg & Cascarino, 2013). For instance, in one program, the Chicago School Readiness
Project, the focus is on enhancing teachers’ classroom management skills so that they are able to
better handle students’ disruptive behavior. Teachers receive training in strategies (e.g., imple-
menting clearer rules and routines, rewarding positive behavior, redirecting negative behavior)
that they can use to better manage students’ behaviors. Studies of this program implemented in
Head Start centers showed that the program led to significant improvements in children’s execu-
tive functioning over the course of the school year. Improvements in children’s preacademic skills
(vocabulary, letter naming) were also found (Raver et al., 2008, 2011). However, when students
participating in the program were followed through kindergarten, the positive effects were not
maintained (Morris et al., 2014).
In another prekindergarten-targeted program, Tools of the Mind, teacher training is focused on
adult-supported pretend play with students. A central component of this program is a daily 50-min
period of make-believe play designed to enhance children’s planning skills, focused attention, and
working memory. During this time, the teacher scaffolds the children in their attempts to take on a
challenging task, such as planning a role-playing scenario. In experimental studies of this program
(Barnett et al., 2008; Diamond et al., 2007), preschool students in Tools classrooms showed higher
levels of executive functioning by the end of the school year compared to students in control
classrooms. However, as with the previous program, the positive effects were not maintained
when the students were followed into kindergarten (Morris et al., 2014).
Finally, the Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies program focuses on training teachers to
use prescribed weekly lessons targeting children’s problem-solving skills, including the ability to
recognize and regulate emotions, define problems, and engage in anticipatory planning. Studies of
this program have shown improvements in children’s emotion understanding, self-regulation, and
problem-solving skills (Bierman, Domitrovich, et al., 2008; Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair, &
Domitrovich, 2008); one large-scale study, however, showed no improvements in children’s execu-
tive functioning (Morris et al., 2014).
In sum, a number of programs have been designed to enhance preschoolers’ self-regulation skills.
Future studies should examine which programs best target these skills and under what conditions.
Some programs may be more effective depending on teachers’ professional development needs (e.g.,
classroom management) and experience level. Some programs may be harder or easier to implement
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 817

than others. The use of mindfulness practices is a promising approach with respect to ease of
implementation. In this study and others (Schonert-Reichl & Lawlor, 2010; Schonert-Reichl et al.,
2015), teachers found the practices easy to teach to their students. Once students learned the
strategy, it was easily facilitated by other teachers who also received 1 day of training on the
mindfulness practices. This study suggests that a mindfulness program balances ease of implementa-
tion with positive outcomes in self-regulation and academic performance.

Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the children, parents, and teachers at the participating school. We also thank Veronica Angyal and
Ana Schaller for their help with data collection.

References
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2000). Manual for the ASEBA Preschool Forms and Profiles. Burlington:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont.
Ardila, A. (2003). Language representation and working memory with bilinguals. Journal of Communication Disorders,
36, 233–240. doi:10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00022-4
Arias, A. J., Steinberg, K., Banga, A., & Trestan, R. L. (2006). Systematic review of the efficacy of meditation techniques
as treatments for medical illness. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 12, 817–832. doi:10.1089/
acm.2006.12.817
Arnold, D. H., Brown, S. A., Meagher, S., Baker, C. N., Dobbs, J., & Doctoroff, G. L. (2006). Preschool-based programs
for externalizing problems. Education & Treatment of Children, 29, 311–339.
Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 125–143.
Barnett, W. S., Jung, K., Yarosz, D. J., Thomas, J., Hornbeck, A., Stechuk, R., & Burns, S. (2008). Educational effects of
the Tools of the Mind curriculum: A randomized trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 299–313.
doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.03.001
Bierman, K. L., Domitrovich, C. E., Nix, R. L., Gest, S. D., Welsh, J. A., Greenberg, M. T., . . . Gill, S. (2008). Promoting
academic and social-emotional school readiness: The Head Start REDI program. Child Development, 79, 1802–1817.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01227.x
Bierman, K. L., Nix, R. L., Greenberg, M. T., Blair, C., & Domitrovich, C. E. (2008). Executive functions and school
readiness intervention: Impact, moderation, and mediation in the Head Start REDI program. Development and
Psychopathology, 20, 821–843. doi:10.1017/S0954579408000394
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to
emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78, 647–663. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8624.2007.01019.x
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-
being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822–848. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
Carvajal, H. H., Parks, J. P., Logan, R. A., & Page, G. L. (1992). Comparisons of the IQ and vocabulary scores on
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised.
Psychology in the Schools, 29, 22–24. doi:10.1002/1520-6807(199201)29:1<22::AID-PITS2310290105>3.0.CO;2-P
Caughy, M. O., Mills, B., Owen, M. T., & Hurst, J. R. (2013). Emergent self-regulation skills among very young ethnic
minority children: A confirmatory factor model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116, 839–855.
doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.07.017
Claessens, A., & Dowsett, C. (2014). Growth and change in attention problems, disruptive behavior, and achievement
from kindergarten to fifth grade. Psychological Science, 25, 2241–2251. doi:10.1177/0956797614554265
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Creswell, J. D., Way, B. M., Eisenberger, N. I., & Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Neural correlates of dispositional
mindfulness during affect labeling. Psychosomatic Medicine, 69, 560–565. doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3180f6171f
Davidson, R. J., Dunne, J., Eccles, J. S., Engle, A., Greenberg, M., Jennings, P., & Vago, D. (2012). Contemplative
practices and mental training: Prospects for American education. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 146–153.
doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00240.x
Denham, S. A., & Brown, C. (2010). “Plays nice with others”: Social emotional learning and academic success. Early
Education & Development, 21, 652–680. doi:10.1080/10409289.2010.497450
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-
113011-143750
818 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

Diamond, A. (2014). Want to optimize executive functions and academic outcomes? Simple, just nourish the human
spirit. In P. D. Zelazo & M. D. Sera (Eds.), Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology: Vol. 37. Developing cognitive
control processes: Mechanisms, implications, and interventions (pp. 205–230). New York, NY: Wiley.
Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007, November 30). Preschool program improves cognitive
control. Science, 318, 1387–1388. doi:10.1126/science.1151148
Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011, August 19). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to
12 years old. Science, 333, 959–964. doi:10.1126/science.1204529
Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (2007). The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (4th ed.). Bloomington, MN: NCS Pearson.
Eigsti, I. M., Zayas, V., Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., Ayduk, O., Dadlani, M., & Casey, B. J. (2006). Predicting cognitive
control from preschool to late adolescence and young adulthood. Psychological Science, 17, 478–484. doi:10.1111/
j.1467-9280.2006.01732.x
Farb, N. A., Segal, Z. V., Mayberg, H., Bean, J., McKeon, D., Fatima, Z., & Anderson, A. K. (2007). Attending to the
present: Mindfulness meditation reveals distinct neural modes of self-reference. Social Cognitive and Affective
Neuroscience, 2, 313–322. doi:10.1093/scan/nsm030
Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., & Davidson, R. J. (2015). Promoting prosocial behavior and self-regulatory skills
in preschool children through a mindfulness-based kindness curriculum. Developmental Psychology, 51, 44–51.
doi:10.1037/a0038256
Flook, L., Smalley, S. L., Kitil, M. J., Galla, B. M., Kaiser-Greenland, S., Locke, J., . . . Kasari, C. (2010). Effects of
mindful awareness practices on executive functions in elementary school children. Journal of Applied School
Psychology, 26, 70–95. doi:10.1080/15377900903379125
Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrated
framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 32–60. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31
Gioia, G. A., Espy, K. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2002). Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Preschool Version
(BRIEF-P). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits:
A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57, 35–43. doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(03)00573-7
Hackman, D. A., & Farah, M. J. (2008). Socioeconomic status and the developing brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
13, 65–73. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.003
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W.
Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hodapp, A. F. (1993). Correlation between Stanford-Binet IV and PPVT-R scores for young children. Psychological
Reports, 73, 1152–1154. doi:10.2466/pr0.1993.73.3f.1152
Jha, A. P., Krompinger, J., & Baime, M. J. (2007). Mindfulness training modifies subsystems of attention. Cognitive,
Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 109–119. doi:10.3758/CABN.7.2.109
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1982). An out-patient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice
of mindfulness meditation: Theoretical considerations and preliminary results. General Hospital Psychiatry, 4, 33–
47. doi:10.1016/0163-8343(82)90026-3
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Mindfulness meditation for everyday life. New York, NY: Hyperion.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology:
Science and Practice, 10, 144–156.
Kaiser-Greenland, S. (2010). The mindful child. New York, NY: Free Press.
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension
and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883. doi:10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2
Lutz, A., Slagter, H., Rawling, N., Francis, A., Greischar, L. L., & Davidson, R. J. (2009). Mental training enhances
attentional stability: Neural and behavioral evidence. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 13418–13427. doi:10.1523/
JNEUROSCI.1614-09.2009
Marcus, M. T., Fine, M., Moeller, G., Khan, M. M., Pitts, K., Swank, P. R., & Liehr, P. (2003). Change in stress levels
following mindfulness-based stress reduction in a therapeutic community. Addictive Disorders & Their Treatment,
2, 63–68. doi:10.1097/00132576-200302030-00001
Mathes, P., Torgeson, J., & Herron, J. (2011). Technical manual: Istation’s Indicators of Progress, Early Reading, Version
4. Richardson, TX: Istation.
McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C., Jewkes, A., & Morrison, F. (2007). Links between
behavioral regulation and preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychology, 43, 947–
959. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.947
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. I. (1989, May 26). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244, 933–938.
doi:10.1126/science.2658056
Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., & Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of
childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
USA, 108, 2693–2698. doi:10.1073/pnas.1010076108
Morris, P., Mattera, S. K., Castells, N., Bangser, M., Bierman, K., & Raver, C. (2014). Impact findings from the Head
Start CARES demonstration: National evaluation of three approaches to improving preschoolers’ social and emotional
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 819

competence (OPRE Report No. 2014–44). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation.
Napoli, M., Krech, P. R., & Holley, L. C. (2005). Mindfulness training for elementary school students: The Attention
Academy. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 21, 99–125. doi:10.1300/J370v21n01_05
Ortner, C. N. M., Kilner, S. J., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Mindfulness meditation and reduced emotional interference on a
cognitive task. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 271–283. doi:10.1007/s11031-007-9076-7
Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A structured observation of behavioral self-
regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 45, 605–619. doi:10.1037/
a0015365
Ramel, W., Goldin, P. R., Carmona, P. E., & McQuaid, J. R. (2004). The effects of mindfulness meditation on cognitive
processes and affect in patients with past depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28, 433–455. doi:10.1023/B:
COTR.0000045557.15923.96
Raver, C. C., Garner, P., & Smith-Donald, R. (2007). The roles of emotion regulation and emotion knowledge for
children’s academic readiness: Are the links causal? In R. C. Pianta, M. J. Cox, & K. L. Snow (Eds.), School readiness
and the transition to kindergarten in the era of accountability (pp. 121–147). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C. P., Metzger, M., Champion, K., & Sardin, L. (2008). Improving preschool
classroom processes: Preliminary findings from a randomized trial implemented in Head Start settings. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 10–26. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.09.001
Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C. P., Zhai, F., Bub, K., & Pressler, E. (2011). CSRP’s impact on low-income
preschoolers’ pre-academic skills: Self-regulation as a mediating mechanism. Child Development, 82, 362–378.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01561.x
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992). Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC). Circle Pines, MN:
American Guidance Service.
Saltzman, A., & Goldin, P. (2008). Mindfulness based stress reduction for school-age children. In S. C. Hayes & L. A.
Greco (Eds.), Acceptance and mindfulness interventions for children, adolescents, and families (pp. 139–161).
Oakland, CA: Context Press/New Harbinger.
Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1989). Is good strategy use possible? In W. Schneider & M. Pressley (Eds.), Memory
development between 2 and 20 (pp. 161–194). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Lawlor, M. S. (2010). The effects of a mindfulness-based education program on pre- and
early adolescents’ well-being and social and emotional competence. Mindfulness, 1, 137–151. doi:10.1007/
s12671-010-0011-8
Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Oberle, E., Lawlor, M. S., Abbott, D., Thomson, K., Oberlander, T. F., & Diamond, A. (2015).
Enhancing cognitive and social-emotional development through a simple-to-administer mindfulness-based school
program for elementary school children: A randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 51, 52–66.
doi:10.1037/a0038454
Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: A new
approach to preventing relapse. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Singer, T., & Lamm, C. (2009). The social neuroscience of empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156,
81–96. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04418.x
Slagter, H. A., Lutz, A., Greischar, L. L., Francis, A. D., Nieuwenhuis, S., Davis, J. M., & Davidson, R. J. (2007). Mental
training affects use of limited brain resources. PLoS Biology, 5(e138). doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050138
Smith-Donald, R., Raver, C. C., Hayes, T., & Richardson, B. (2007). Preliminary construct and concurrent validity of
the Preschool Self-Regulation Assessment (PSRA) for field-based research. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22,
173–187. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.01.002
Tang, Y. Y., Ma, Y., Wang, J., Fan, Y., Feng, S., Lu, Q., & Posner, M. I. (2007). Short-term meditation training
improves attention and self-regulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 104, 17152–17156.
doi:10.1073/pnas.0707678104
Weissberg, R. P., & Cascarino, J. (2013). Academic learning + social-emotional learning = national priority. Phi Delta
Kappan, 95, 8–13. doi:10.1177/003172171309500203
Witek-Janusek, L., Albuquerque, K., Chroniak, K. R., Chroniak, C., Durazo-Arvizu, R., & Mathews, H. L. (2008). Effect
of mindfulness based stress reduction on immune function, quality of life and coping in women newly
diagnosed with early stage breast cancer. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 22, 969–981. doi:10.1016/j.
bbi.2008.01.012
Zelazo, P. D., Carlson, S. M., & Kesek, A. (2008). Development of executive function in childhood. In C. A. Nelson &
M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 553–574). Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Zelazo, P. D., & Lyons, K. E. (2012). The potential benefits of mindfulness training in early childhood: A develop-
mental social cognitive neuroscience perspective. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 154–160.
820 K. L. THIERRY ET AL.

Appendix

MindUP Program: Lesson Objectives

Unit 1: Quieting the Mind, Sharpening the Focus
Lesson 1: About the Brain
Students will identify the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex on a diagram of the brain.
Students will give a simple definition of the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex.
Lesson 2: Introduction to Mindfulness
Students will describe the difference between mindfulness and mindlessness.
Students will apply the concepts of mindfulness and mindlessness in their own lives.
Lesson 3: Focusing Our Awareness
Students practice and utilize mindful listening and mindful breathing.
Unit 2: Our Senses
Lesson 4: Mindful Listening
Students practice mindfulness-focused awareness skills via mindful listening and reflective listening activities.
Students will describe their experience with the mindful listening exercises and discuss how they may listen
differently at all times and why listening skills are important.
Lesson 5: Mindful Seeing
Students will practice focusing their attention on an external object and describe visual details about it.
Students will describe the importance of paying attention to detail using their visual memory.
Lesson 6: Mindful Smelling
Students will practice focusing their attention on an external object.
Students will describe the various scents and identify any thoughts and/or feelings that arise from the scents.
Lesson 7: Mindful Tasting
Students will practice focusing their attention on an external object and describe their experience of mindfully
tasting compared to how they might normally taste.
Students will review mindful seeing and mindful smelling during the mindful tasting activity.
Lesson 8: Mindful Movement I
Students will practice focusing their attention on the internal sensations of their body.
Students will describe what signals their bodies give them in different emotional states (e.g., excited and nervous).
Lesson 9: Mindful Movement II
Students practice mindful movement activities.
Students will describe their experience with the mindful movement exercises and discuss how they may normally
move differently.
Unit 3: Practical Applications: Building Blocks to Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
Lesson 10: Perspective Taking
Students will identify different perspectives taken by the characters in the same story.
Students will extrapolate the perspective-taking fable activity to social situations in their own lives.

Lesson 11: Learning Optimism

Students will discuss two different ways, optimistic versus pessimistic, to think about, feel about, and approach a
problem.
Students will practice strategies to help them take on a more optimistic outlook in their own lives.
Lesson 12: Happy Experiences
Students will describe the thoughts and feelings that are associated with a common happy experience.
Students will practice savoring a happy personal experience and describe their thoughts and feelings.
 EARLY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT 821

Unit 4: Mindful of Ourselves in the World

Lesson 13: Gratitude
Students are able to define “gratitude.”
Students will identify one or more things in their life that they are grateful for.
Lesson 14: Acts of Kindness
Students will perform three acts of kindness and report on their experiences.
Lesson 15: Mindful Actions in Our Community
Students will describe how they can make a positive difference through mindful choices and actions.