The Impact of a Mindfulness- and Compassion-Based Intervention on Stress, Burnout, and Psychological Well-Being Among Arab Teachers in Israel: A Longitudinal Study

The Impact of a Mindfulness- and Compassion-Based Intervention on Stress, Burnout, and Psychological Well-Being Among Arab Teachers in Israel: A Longitudinal Study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Impact of a Mindfulness- and Compassion-Based Intervention on Stress, Burnout, and Psychological Well-Being Among Arab Teachers in Israel: A Longitudinal Study giana khalifa This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study examined a mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development program in the Arab education system in Israel, using a quasi-experimental longitudinal design. Teachers in an intervention ( n = 111) and a comparison group ( n = 31) completed questionnaires at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and six-month follow-up. Participation in the program was associated with reductions in perceived stress and burnout and increases in overall mindfulness (observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity), interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy. No intervention-related effects were found for anxiety, job satisfaction, or the non-judging facet of mindfulness. Analyses of covariance controlling for baseline differences supported the robustness of the findings. Overall, mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions may strengthen multiple aspects of teacher well-being and professional functioning in a collectivistic cultural context, supporting the cultural adaptability and potential scalability of such programs within educational systems. mindfulness compassion teachers burnout stress Arab education system Figures Figure 1 Introduction Teaching is a demanding profession, marked by continuous cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal challenges that can adversely affect teachers’ psychological health and professional effectiveness (Herman et al., 2020; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ). Teachers are responsible for instructional duties, classroom management, administrative tasks, and cultivating relationships with students, parents, and staff. They often work in environments with limited resources and high expectations (Hakanen et al., 2006). These demands often lead to high levels of occupational stress and burnout, which are associated with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced feelings of accomplishment (Maslach et al., 2001 ; Shen et al., 2015). Consequently, interventions that can effectively improve teachers’ well-being and professional efficacy are needed (Fernet et al., 2012). One potentially effective strategy is implementing mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs). Mindfulness is defined as nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 2003). Mindfulness training can improve emotional regulation, attention control, cognitive flexibility, and self-awareness while reducing stress and anxiety (Hölzel et al., 2011 ; Meiklejohn et al., 2012 ). These beneficial effects are underpinned by mechanisms including attention regulation, bodily awareness, emotional regulation, and shifts in self-perception (Hölzel et al., 2011 ). Initially designed for clinical environments, MBIs have been adapted for educational settings, showing positive outcomes for educators and learners (Meiklejohn et al., 2012 ; Shapiro et al., 2006 ). However, despite the growing body of scholarly research on MBIs, longitudinal studies examining the longevity of intervention effects over an extended period are lacking (Cheng et al., 2021 ). Most studies have used short-term designs, which limit the ability to evaluate the sustainability of intervention outcomes. Considering these deficiencies, this study explores the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-oriented intervention for Arab educators in Israel. Specifically, the study aims to analyze changes over time in educators’ perceived stress, burnout, mindfulness, self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction. Using a multidimensional, longitudinal approach, this study aims to provide culturally relevant, empirically substantial evidence regarding educator well-being and professional efficacy. Literature Review Teacher Stress and Burnout Teaching entails significant demands, characterized by persistent cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal challenges, thereby placing educators at an elevated risk for experiencing stress and burnout (Herman et al., 2020; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ; Kyriacou, 2001). Burnout, comprising aspects such as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment, has been repeatedly associated with adverse consequences for both educators and learners (Maslach et al., 2001 ; Shen et al., 2015). Furthermore, factors such as excessive workload, temporal constraints, and intricate classroom obligations further intensify the psychological strain experienced by teachers (Hakanen et al., 2006; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017). These challenges underscore the necessity of identifying efficacious interventions that promote teachers’ well-being and professional efficacy. Mindfulness-Based Interventions in Education A growing body of research has identified MBIs as a potentially effective strategy for fostering teacher well-being. Mindfulness is conceptualized as a nonjudgmental awareness of experiences occurring in the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 2003). Mindfulness facilitates emotional regulation, attentional control, and cognitive flexibility while concomitantly reducing stress and anxiety (Hölzel et al., 2011 ; Meiklejohn et al., 2012 ; Tang et al., 2015). In educational settings, MBIs have been adopted by educators at an increasing rate. They can lead to significant reductions in stress and burnout, as well as improvements in psychological well-being (Flook et al., 2013 ; Hidajat et al., 2023 ; Klingbeil & Renshaw, 2018 ). Systematic reviews further corroborate the efficacy of these interventions; however, they also reveal variability in outcomes and methodological constraints across the studies reviewed (Avola et al., 2025 ; Beames et al., 2023 ; Emerson et al., 2017). Compassion and Self-Compassion in Teaching In addition to mindfulness, compassion and self-compassion have been identified as pivotal psychological resources for educators. Self-compassion, defined as a benevolent and impartial attitude toward oneself during challenging experiences, has been linked to reduced stress and burnout and increased emotional resilience (MacBeth & Gumley, 2012; Neff, 2003 ; Yin et al., 2023 ). Compassion-based methodologies also enhance interpersonal functioning, as evidenced by increased empathy and improved teacher–student dynamics (Dunn & Larson, 2023 ; Jennings, 2015). Additionally, the integration of mindfulness and compassion can amplify intervention effects by addressing both intrapersonal and interpersonal facets of educator functioning (Conversano et al., 2020; Roeser et al., 2021 ). Mechanisms of Change in Mindfulness-Based Interventions The efficacy of MBIs is supported by numerous psychological mechanisms. These mechanisms include enhancements in emotion regulation, attentional capacities, and decentering, which facilitate more adaptive responses to stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., 2020 ; Gu et al., 2015; Hölzel et al., 2011 ). Empirical investigations have also illuminated the importance of mindfulness facets, such as acting with awareness and non-reactivity, in alleviating occupational stress and emotional exhaustion (Lensen et al., 2024 ). Furthermore, mindfulness has been associated with psychological flexibility and well-being, thereby reinforcing its role as a protective factor in high-demand professions, including teaching (He et al., 2023 ; Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010; Liu & Du, 2024 ). Cultural Context: Arab Teachers in Israel Arab teachers in Israel work within a distinctive sociocultural and educational context that may shape both the sources of occupational stress and the ways in which well-being interventions are experienced. The Arab education system in Israel has been described as operating under structural and contextual constraints, including limited resources and broader sociopolitical pressures, that can intensify professional demands (AbuʽAsba, 2007; Samoha, 2001). In addition, collectivistic cultural norms may influence teachers’ help-seeking patterns, coping strategies, and the salience of relational and community-oriented aspects of professional functioning. Within this context, mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions may be particularly relevant because they target core processes associated with stress regulation and interpersonal functioning. Mindfulness training has been linked to improvements in emotion regulation, attention, and decentering, mechanisms that support more adaptive responses to stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., 2020 ; Gu et al., 2015; Hölzel et al., 2011 ). Moreover, specific mindfulness facets, such as acting with awareness and non-reactivity, have been associated with lower occupational strain and burnout-related symptoms (Lensen et al., 2024 ). Mindfulness has also been linked to psychological flexibility and well-being, reinforcing its potential as a protective factor in high-demand professions, such as teaching (He et al., 2023 ; Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010; Liu & Du, 2024 ). Importantly, emerging evidence suggests that mindfulness-based programs can be adapted across cultures when delivered in contextually sensitive ways, highlighting their potential applicability within the Arab education system in Israel (Silva-Paz & Davidovitch, 2025 ). Research Gaps and the Need for Longitudinal Studies Despite the growing body of research on MBIs, several important gaps remain. Many studies rely on short-term designs and self-report measures, and longitudinal research examining intervention effects is lacking, limiting the ability to draw conclusions regarding the long-term effectiveness of such interventions (Hidajat et al., 2023 ). This limitation is particularly evident in studies conducted within culturally underrepresented populations, such as Arab teachers in Israel (Cheng et al., 2021 ; Silva-Paz & Davidovitch, 2025 ). Furthermore, research has often focused on a relatively narrow range of outcomes, primarily stress reduction, while neglecting broader dimensions of teacher well-being and professional functioning. Therefore, adopting a more comprehensive, teacher-centered perspective that includes constructs such as mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching is necessary (Beames et al., 2023 ; Roeser et al., 2021 ). The Present Study In response to these gaps, this study examines the impact of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among Arab teachers in Israel using a longitudinal design with repeated measurements and a comparison group. By adopting a multidimensional approach to teacher well-being that includes stress, burnout, mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, anxiety, and job satisfaction, this study aims to provide culturally grounded and empirically robust evidence regarding the effectiveness of such interventions across multiple domains of teachers’ psychological and professional functioning. Rationale for the Study The rationale for this study is grounded in three interconnected gaps in the literature. First, the need for further research on mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions in culturally underrepresented contexts, particularly within the Arab education system in Israel, is clear (Lensen et al., 2024 ; Silva-Paz & Davidovitch, 2025 ). Second, moving beyond narrow outcome models and examining a broader range of teacher-centered variables, including not only stress and burnout but also mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, is necessary (Beames et al., 2023 ; Roeser et al., 2021 ). Third, longitudinal evidence clarifying which intervention effects are sustained over time is lacking. Accordingly, the present study evaluates the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention using a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. By doing so, it seeks to provide more precise and contextually relevant evidence regarding the dimensions of teacher well-being and professional functioning that are most responsive to this type of intervention. Research Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention on Arab teachers in Israel. Specifically, the study investigates whether participation in the program is associated with longitudinal changes in teachers’ perceived stress, burnout, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction. In addition, the study aims to provide contextually grounded evidence regarding the applicability of mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development within a non-Western educational setting that has received limited scholarly attention. Research Novelty This study advances the literature in three key ways. First, it addresses an important contextual gap by examining a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among Arab teachers in Israel, a culturally distinct and underrepresented population in mindfulness research. Second, it extends prior work by adopting a comprehensive, teacher-centered framework that assesses multiple domains of psychological and professional functioning, including burnout, mindfulness (including interpersonal mindfulness in teaching), self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction. Third, by employing a longitudinal design with measurements at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up, the study contributes evidence regarding both immediate outcomes and the sustainability of intervention effects over time. Research Questions This study is guided by the following research questions: To what extent does participation in a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention reduce perceived stress among Arab teachers in Israel over time? To what extent does participation in the intervention reduce teacher burnout over time? To what extent does participation in the intervention enhance teachers’ mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy over time? To what extent is participation in the intervention associated with changes in teachers’ anxiety and job satisfaction over time? Hypotheses Based on prior research on mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions and the conceptual integration of mindfulness and compassion in the present program, the following hypotheses were formulated: H1: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater decrease in teachers’ perceived stress over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H2: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater decrease in teachers’ burnout over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H3: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ overall mindfulness over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H4: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in interpersonal mindfulness in teaching over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H5: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ self-compassion over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H6: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ empathy over time compared with participation in the comparison group. H7 (exploratory): Participation in the intervention may be associated with changes in teachers’ anxiety over time. H8 (exploratory): Participation in the intervention may be associated with changes in teachers’ job satisfaction over time. Method Research Design This study employed a quantitative quasi-experimental longitudinal design to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention with Arab teachers in Israel. The design included an intervention group and a comparison group, with repeated measurements collected at three time points: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up. Random assignment was not feasible, as the professional development programs implemented in each school were determined by school principals. Accordingly, teachers in schools whose principals selected the Call to Care program were assigned to the intervention group, whereas teachers in schools whose principals selected an alternative professional development workshop served as the comparison group. Participants The study was conducted in eight elementary schools within the Arab education system in Israel (Grades 4–6). Six schools participated in the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention, and two schools participated in an alternative workshop serving as the comparison condition. Teachers were recruited by principals in collaboration with school counselors, with priority given to homeroom teachers and then subject teachers. The sample included 142 teachers (intervention: n = 111; comparison: n = 31) and was predominantly female (25 men, 17.9%; 115 women, 82.1%). Participants ranged in age from 26 to 63 years ( M = 39.92, SD = 7.51). Teaching experience ranged from 1 to 43 years ( M = 16.26, SD = 8.03), and tenure at the current school ranged from 1 to 43 years ( M = 11.47, SD = 7.73). Most participants held a bachelor’s degree (66.7%), followed by a master’s degree or higher (23.4%), and a teaching certificate (9.2%). At follow-up, data were available for 115 teachers (intervention: n = 90; comparison: n = 25). Intervention and Comparison Conditions Teachers in the intervention group participated in the Call to Care–Israel program, a mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development workshop designed to enhance awareness, emotional regulation, self-compassion, empathy, and interpersonal sensitivity. The program consisted of 12 weekly sessions and was structured around three interconnected modes of care: receiving care from others, cultivating self-care, and extending care to others. Each mode included four sessions that combined theoretical input with experiential practice. The structure and content of the Call to Care–Israel program are presented in Table 1. Throughout the program, teachers engaged in guided meditation, breathing exercises, imagery, reflective discussions, psychoeducational components, and group sharing. In addition, participants were encouraged to engage in daily home practice and to gradually integrate adapted mindfulness-based exercises into their classroom routines. Teachers in the comparison group participated in an alternative professional development workshop titled The Classroom as a Learning Community. This program consisted of weekly sessions of approximately 2.5 h over a period of approximately two months and focused on pedagogical topics, such as differentiated instruction, active learning, classroom organization, and teacher–student interaction. Importantly, the comparison workshop did not include mindfulness, compassion-based content, or contemplative practices. Week Mode Objectives Skills 1 Introduction Getting to know the teachers Introducing the program Setting the rules for the training Understanding the causes of burnout Developing burnout prevention strategies. Diaphragmatic breathing 2 Introduction Introducing the theoretical framework “Safe place” imagery 3 Receiving Care Introducing the concept of mindfulness Enhancing motivation to practice mindfulness Vagal breathing 4 Receiving Care Teaching about different attitudes of relation to oneself Learning the differences between self-esteem and self-compassion . Brief mindfulness practice Self-affirmation practice 5 Receiving Care Dealing with destructive feelings Dealing with barriers to receiving care Deepening the practice of compassion meditation Mindfulness practice Compassion meditation: Dear person 6 Receiving Care The need for receiving care Mindfulness practice Receiving care imagery 7 Self-Care Evaluating levels of self-care Identifying needs for self-compassion Designing daily self-compassion practices Mindfulness practice Meditation: Self-compassion, self-affirmation 8 Self-Care Identifying barriers to self-compassion Practicing self-gratitude Developing awareness of self-criticism Learning ways to combat self-criticism Meditation: Self-acceptance, self-gratitude 9 Extending Care Introducing the concept of radical compassion Learning to practice radical compassion Exploring the benefits of giving to others Practicing small care gestures toward others Meditation: From receiving to giving Accepting challenging people 10 Extending Care Empathic communication The basis of human judgment Meditation: Empathic communication 11 Extending Care Understanding stereotyping and prejudice Critical thinking. The bystander effect Critical thinking practice 12 Extending Care Designing a student project focusing on giving to the community Summary, reflection Applying the tools acquired in the program in daily life Measures Demographic Questionnaire. A demographic questionnaire was administered to collect background information, including age, gender, marital status, education level, teaching experience, professional role in school, participation in professional training, and interest in mindfulness workshops. Work-Related Stress. Work-related stress was measured using a 20-item questionnaire based on Bhagat et al. (1991). The scale assesses role conflict, role ambiguity, and workload using a 5-point Likert response format ranging from 1 (very slightly true) to 5 (very true). Internal consistency in the present study was satisfactory across the three measurement points (α = .76, .84, and .87). Anxiety (BSI-18). Anxiety was measured using the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18), which includes 18 items assessing psychological distress symptoms rated on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Reliability was high across the three measurement points (α = .94, .94, and .90). Job Satisfaction. Job satisfaction was measured using the Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale (Caprara et al., 2003), which includes four items rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Internal consistency coefficients were .86, .83, and .95 across the three measurement points. Burnout. Burnout was assessed using a 14-item adapted version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach & Jackson, 1981; McCormick & Barnett, 2011), covering depersonalization, personal accomplishment, and emotional exhaustion. Responses were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Reliability was strong across the three time points (α = .87, .91, and .92). Empathy. Empathy was measured using the Teacher Empathy Questionnaire (Chen, 2011), which includes 14 items assessing empathic concern and perspective taking on a 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was translated into Arabic for use with participants. Internal consistency coefficients were .72, .64, and .61 across the three measurements. Mindfulness. Mindfulness was assessed using the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (Baer et al., 2006). The questionnaire includes 39 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale and assesses observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging, and non-reactivity. Two items were removed to improve reliability. Overall reliability coefficients were .79, .85, and .86 across the three measurement points. Mindfulness in Teaching. Mindfulness in teaching was measured using the Interpersonal Mindfulness in Teaching Scale (Greenberg et al., 2010), a 20-item instrument assessing mindfulness in day-to-day teaching activities and interactions. Items were rated on a 5-point scale, and ten items were reverse coded. Internal consistency coefficients were .78, .76, and .71 across the three time points. Self-Compassion. Self-compassion was measured using the short form of the Self-Compassion Scale (Raes et al., 2011), which includes 12 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale covers self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, and over-identification, with six reverse-coded items. Internal consistency coefficients were .63, .72, and .71 across the three measurement points. Data Collection Quantitative data were collected from teachers at three measurement points to examine changes over time associated with participation in the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention. Baseline data were collected prior to the intervention (December), post-intervention data were collected immediately after program completion (March), and follow-up data were collected six months later, at the beginning of the subsequent school year, to assess the persistence of intervention effects. At each wave, teachers completed a battery of self-report questionnaires assessing perceived stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. Data collection was conducted in eight elementary schools within the Arab education system in Israel. Teachers from six schools participated in the Call to Care intervention, whereas teachers from two schools participated in an alternative professional development workshop and served as the comparison group. Teachers were recruited by school principals in collaboration with school counselors, with priority given to homeroom teachers, followed by subject teachers. The total sample included 142 teachers (111 in the intervention group and 31 in the comparison group). At follow-up, data were available for 115 teachers (90 in the intervention group and 25 in the comparison group), due to attrition related to factors such as sabbaticals and school transitions. Prior to participation, informed consent was obtained from all teachers. The repeated-measures design enabled the examination of both immediate and longer-term changes in teacher outcomes. Data Analysis Quantitative analyses focused on teacher outcomes. To examine the effects of participation in the intervention over time, linear mixed models were constructed for each dependent variable. The models included measurement time (pre-, post-, follow-up), group (intervention vs. comparison), and the time × group interaction as fixed effects. Teacher gender was included as a covariate. The interaction term was of primary interest, as it tested whether changes over time differed between the intervention and comparison groups. Random effects for age, teaching experience, and school affiliation nested within group were initially specified; however, these models did not converge. Therefore, final models were estimated without these random effects. When significant interaction effects were identified, Bonferroni-corrected post hoc comparisons were conducted to examine within-group changes across measurement points. This analytic approach was applied to all outcome variables, including stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. Ethical Considerations The study was approved by the Ethics Committee XXX and by the Office of the Chief Scientist at the XXX. Informed consent was obtained from all participating teachers prior to data collection. Participation was voluntary, and participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without penalty. All data were collected anonymously and stored securely to ensure confidentiality. Results To examine differences between the two groups in the dependent measures at pretest, independent samples t -tests were conducted. The results indicated that the intervention group exhibited significantly lower levels of stress, anxiety, and burnout, and significantly higher job satisfaction compared with the comparison group. No significant pretest differences were found for empathy, overall mindfulness, the mindfulness subdimensions, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, or self-compassion. Baseline comparisons for demographic characteristics further showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in age, teaching experience, school seniority, gender, or educational level, indicating that the groups were broadly comparable prior to the intervention (see Tables 4 – 7 ). Table 4 Baseline Equivalence in Age, Teaching Experience, and School Seniority Between the Groups Variable Intervention M ( SD ) Comparison M ( SD ) t ( df ) Age 40.57 (7.79) 37.60 (5.97) 1.94 (136) Teaching experience 16.75 (8.40) 14.52 (6.34) 1.37 (140) School seniority 11.53 (8.11) 11.26 (6.34) 0.17 (137) Note. No statistically significant group differences were found. Table 5 Gender Homogeneity Between the Groups Gender Intervention n (%) Comparison n (%) Male 18 (16.4) 7 (23.3) Female 92 (83.6) 23 (76.7) Note. χ² = 0.78, ns. Table 6 Group Differences in Education Level at Baseline Education level Intervention n (%) Comparison n (%) Teaching certificate 11 (14.7) 2 (6.7) Bachelor’s degree 37 (49.3) 21 (70.0) Master’s degree or higher 26 (34.7) 7 (23.3) Other 1 (1.3) 0 (0.0) Note. χ² = 0.60, ns. * p < .01. Table 7 Baseline Differences Between Intervention and Comparison Groups Variable Intervention M ( SD ) Comparison M ( SD ) t ( df ) Stress 2.49 (0.45) 2.88 (0.48) 4.27 (140)** Anxiety 1.06 (0.71) 1.60 (0.89) 3.53 (140)** Job satisfaction 7.52 (1.24) 6.76 (1.60) −2.83 (140)** Burnout 2.62 (0.73) 3.12 (0.73) 3.36 (140)** Empathy 3.74 (0.47) 3.79 (0.49) 0.52 (139) Mindfulness 3.31 (0.36) 3.31 (0.37) 0.07 (140) Observing 3.17 (0.57) 3.20 (0.54) 0.31 (140) Describing 3.40 (0.64) 3.51 (0.52) 0.86 (140) Acting with awareness 3.61 (0.61) 3.49 (0.49) −0.94 (140) Non-judging 3.30 (0.52) 3.23 (0.62) −0.63 (140) Non-reactivity 2.98 (0.54) 3.01 (0.59) 0.27 (140) Mindfulness in teaching 3.59 (0.43) 3.52 (0.40) −0.72 (140) Self-compassion 3.37 (0.40) 3.29 (0.37) −0.94 (140) Note. Higher scores indicate higher levels of each construct. Mixed-model analyses revealed significant interactions between group and time for stress, burnout, empathy, overall mindfulness, observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. By contrast, the interaction between time and group was not significant for anxiety, job satisfaction, or non-judging. The effects of time, group, and the interaction between time and group are summarized in Table 8 . Table 8 The Analysis of Covariance Results for the Post-intervention Measurement, Controlling for Baseline Scores, Age, and Teaching Seniority. Variable Group effect Stress F (1, 131) = 30.28, p < .001 Anxiety F (1, 131) = 19.34, p < .001 Job satisfaction F (1, 131) = 16.25, p < .001 Burnout F (1, 131) = 19.86, p < .001 Empathy F (1, 130) = 21.02, p < .001 Mindfulness F (1, 131) = 42.11, p < .001 Observing F (1, 131) = 7.36, p = .008 Describing F (1, 131) = 24.35, p < .001 Acting with awareness F (1, 131) = 34.35, p < .001 Non-judging F (1, 131) = 1.82, p = .18 Non-reactivity F (1, 131) = 13.16, p < .001 Interpersonal mindfulness in teaching F (1, 131) = 25.21, p < .001 Self-compassion F (1, 131) = 23.85, p < .001 Figure 1(a) shows post hoc comparisons for stress. Post hoc analyses revealed a significant reduction in stress in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = −0.424, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = −0.231, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = −0.655, p < .001). In the comparison group, the decrease from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = −0.214) and the change from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = −0.108) were not significant, whereas the reduction between pre-measurement and follow-up reached significance ( m.d. = −0.322, p = .005). Thus, although stress declined in both groups over time, the reduction was larger and more consistent in the intervention group. As presented in Fig. 1(b ) , anxiety levels decreased over time in both groups. The analyses revealed a significant main effect of group and of time; however, the interaction between time and group was not significant. These findings indicate that although anxiety declined throughout the study period, the pattern of change did not differ significantly between the intervention and comparison groups. Figure 1(c) presents the job satisfaction scores. The analysis revealed a significant main effect of group, whereas neither the main effect of time nor the interaction between time and group reached statistical significance. As can be seen in the figure, job satisfaction remained relatively stable throughout the study period in both groups, indicating that participation in the intervention was not associated with a significant change in job satisfaction over time. As shown in Fig. 1(d), post hoc analyses revealed a significant reduction in burnout in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = −0.526, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = −0.318, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = −0.844, p < .001). By contrast, no significant changes were observed in the comparison group across any of the three measurement intervals. These findings indicate that burnout decreased over time, with a substantially greater and more consistent reduction in the intervention group. Figure 1(e) shows post hoc comparisons for empathy. The analysis revealed a significant interaction between time and group. Post hoc analyses indicated that no significant changes in empathy occurred in the comparison group across any of the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated a significant increase in empathy from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.183, p < .001), whereas the increase from post-measurement to follow-up was not significant ( m.d. = 0.091, n.s.). Nevertheless, the overall increase from pre-measurement to follow-up was significant ( m.d. = 0.274, p < .001). As presented in Fig. 1(f), post hoc analyses revealed a significant increase in overall mindfulness in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.370, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.232, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.602, p < .001). No significant changes were observed in the comparison group across any measurement interval. Thus, overall mindfulness increased steadily across all three time points in the intervention group only. Figure 1(g) presents the scores of the observing dimension of mindfulness. Post hoc analyses revealed no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases in observing from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.330, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.324, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.654, p < .001). As shown in Fig. 1(h), a similar pattern was obtained for the describing dimension of mindfulness. No significant changes were found in the comparison group, whereas the intervention group showed significant increases from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.437, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.244, p < .01), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.680, p < .001). Figure 1(i) shows the scores of the acting with awareness dimension of mindfulness. In the comparison group, the change from pre- to post-measurement was not significant ( m.d. = −0.207), whereas the increase from post-measurement to follow-up reached significance ( m.d. = 0.329, p < .05); however, the overall difference between pre-measurement and follow-up was not significant ( m.d. = 0.122). By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant and continuous increases across all measurement intervals: from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.370, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.205, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.574, p < .001). By contrast, no significant effects were found for the dimension of non-judging, as shown in Fig. 1(j). The analysis showed no significant main effect of group, no significant main effect of time, and no significant interaction between time and group. As can be seen in the figure, non-judging remained stable throughout the study period in both groups. As presented in Fig. 1(k), post hoc analyses for non-reactivity revealed no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.387, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.169, p < .05), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.557, p < .001). Figure 1(l) shows the scores of interpersonal mindfulness in teaching. Post hoc comparisons indicated no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.250, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.151, p < .05), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.402, p < .001). These findings indicate that interpersonal mindfulness in teaching increased significantly in the intervention group only. Finally, Fig. 1(m ) presents self-compassion scores. In the comparison group, no significant change was observed from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = −0.072), although a significant increase was found from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.257, p < .05); however, the overall difference between pre-measurement and follow-up was not significant ( m.d. = 0.185). By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant and continuous increases across all measurement intervals: from pre- to post-measurement ( m.d. = 0.383, p < .001), from post-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.263, p < .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up ( m.d. = 0.646, p < .001). Given that baseline differences were identified for several variables, additional analyses of covariance were conducted to examine whether the observed post-intervention differences could be attributed to the pre-existing group differences rather than to the intervention. These analyses compared the groups at the post-intervention measurement while controlling for baseline scores, age, and teaching seniority. As presented in Table 8 , the analysis of covariance results were consistent with the primary analysis results. Significant adjusted group effects were found for stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, overall mindfulness, observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. The only variable that did not show a significant adjusted group difference was non-judging. Overall, these findings strengthen confidence in the robustness of the intervention effects and suggest that the observed differences are unlikely to be attributable to baseline disparities between the groups. Discussion The findings indicate that the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention was most effective in domains closely related to teachers’ emotional regulation and professional coping, including stress, burnout, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy. These results are consistent with prior research showing that MBIs tend to produce stronger effects on occupational strain and internal regulatory capacities than on broader or more distal indicators of well-being (Beames et al., 2023 ; Flook et al., 2013 ; Hidajat et al., 2023 ; Klingbeil & Renshaw, 2018 ). Importantly, the present study extends this literature by demonstrating that these effects were not only immediate but also largely sustained over time within a culturally underrepresented context. The reduction in stress and burnout represents one of the most robust findings of the study. This pattern aligns with previous research suggesting that mindfulness interventions help teachers respond to professional demands with greater emotional balance and reduced reactivity (Cheng et al., 2021 ; Flook et al., 2013 ; Lensen et al., 2024 ; Taylor et al., 2021 ). Moreover, the magnitude and consistency of the effects observed here may reflect the integrated nature of the program, which combined mindfulness and compassion and emphasized repeated practice over time. This finding supports theoretical perspectives suggesting that interventions addressing both attentional and relational processes may be particularly well suited to the emotional demands of teaching (Dunn & Larson, 2023 ; Roeser et al., 2021 ). The observed increases in overall mindfulness and in specific facets—observing, describing, acting with awareness, and non-reactivity—are also consistent with existing theoretical models. Research has emphasized that mindfulness training enhances attentional control, awareness of internal experience, and the capacity to pause before reacting under stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., 2020 ; Hölzel et al., 2011 ; Shapiro et al., 2006 ). The present findings further suggest that improvements in acting with awareness and non-reactivity may be especially relevant for reducing occupational stress and supporting adaptive classroom functioning (Lensen et al., 2024 ). In this sense, the intervention appears to have strengthened both general mindfulness and the specific capacities most directly linked to professional practice. By contrast, the absence of a significant effect on the non-judging facet highlights the multidimensional nature of mindfulness. This finding suggests that not all components of mindfulness are equally responsive to intervention and that some aspects—particularly those involving deep-seated evaluative tendencies—may require more intensive or prolonged practice. This interpretation is consistent with previous studies reporting differential responsiveness across mindfulness facets (Beames et al., 2023 ; Klingbeil & Renshaw, 2018 ), and it contributes to a more nuanced understanding of how mindfulness develops among teachers. The increase in self-compassion is theoretically meaningful, as self-compassion has been identified as a key protective factor against burnout and emotional exhaustion in educators. This result aligns with prior research linking self-compassion to resilience, reduced self-criticism, and more adaptive coping (Neff, 2003 ; Yin et al., 2023 ). It also supports the view that compassion-based components may deepen the impact of mindfulness interventions by shaping how individuals relate to their own distress (Conversano et al., 2020; Roeser et al., 2021 ). In the present study, this may help explain the sustained reductions in burnout, suggesting that teachers became both more attentive to their experiences and more supportive toward themselves. The positive effects on empathy and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching further indicate that the intervention influenced both intrapersonal and interpersonal domains. This finding is consistent with research suggesting that mindfulness and compassion enhance teachers’ attunement to students and improve the quality of classroom interactions (Brown et al., 2023 ; Dunn & Larson, 2023 ; Roeser et al., 2021 ). The observed improvements in interpersonal mindfulness in teaching are particularly important, as they suggest that the effects of the intervention extended beyond internal psychological processes to teachers’ professional interactions, thereby strengthening its practical educational relevance. Nevertheless, the absence of significant effects on anxiety and job satisfaction warrants careful consideration. Although some studies have reported reductions in anxiety following mindfulness interventions (Cheng et al., 2021 ; Demmin et al., 2022 ), findings in this domain are often less consistent than those for stress and burnout (Beames et al., 2023 ; Hidajat et al., 2023 ). Anxiety may be influenced by broader personal and contextual factors that are not directly addressed by school-based interventions. Similarly, job satisfaction is likely shaped by structural conditions, such as workload, organizational climate, and educational policy, which are not easily modified through mindfulness training alone (Buskila & Chen-Levi, 2021a , 2021b ). Thus, the absence of change in these variables is theoretically plausible rather than contradictory. An important contribution of the present study is its focus on Arab teachers in Israel, a population that has received limited attention in the mindfulness literature. The findings support the view that MBIs can be culturally adaptable when implemented in contextually sensitive ways (Haidar et al., 2024 ; Silva-Paz & Davidovitch, 2025 ). Furthermore, the results suggest that the core mechanisms of mindfulness, such as emotional regulation and decentering, may operate across cultural contexts, particularly when compassion and relational elements are explicitly integrated (Berkovich-Ohana et al., 2020 ). Several limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the quasi-experimental design limits causal inference, as participants were not randomly assigned to conditions. Second, the study did not include direct measures of implementation fidelity, dosage, or teacher engagement in the program, making it difficult to determine the extent to which variations in implementation influenced the outcomes. Future research should address these limitations by employing randomized designs and incorporating detailed assessments of implementation processes. Overall, the findings provide robust support for the effectiveness of mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions in enhancing teachers’ emotional regulation and professional functioning. In addition, they highlight that intervention effects are selective rather than universal, with stronger impacts on stress-related and relational outcomes than on broader evaluative constructs. By identifying areas in which such interventions are most effective, the study contributes to a more precise and theoretically grounded understanding of how mindfulness and compassion can support teacher well-being in diverse educational contexts. Limitations and Directions for Future Research Several limitations of the present study should be acknowledged. First, the study employed a quasi-experimental design in which group allocation was not randomized but determined by school principals. This may have introduced selection bias and limits the ability to draw firm causal conclusions. Second, although longitudinal data were collected at three time points, the study relied exclusively on self-report measures. Consequently, the findings may be influenced by common method bias and social desirability effects (Podsakoff et al., 2003 ). To strengthen the validity of the findings, future research would benefit from incorporating additional data sources, such as observational measures, peer reports, or physiological indicators. Third, although teachers were encouraged to engage in regular mindfulness practice, the study did not include systematic monitoring of practice frequency, adherence, or fidelity to the intervention protocol. Given that implementation quality and fidelity are critical determinants of intervention effectiveness (Durlak et al., 2011 ), future studies should include detailed assessments of these factors. Fourth, baseline differences were identified between the intervention and comparison groups for several variables. Although additional analyses controlling for these differences supported the robustness of the findings, future studies employing randomized controlled designs are needed to strengthen causal inference. Finally, the study was conducted within the Arab education system in Israel, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other cultural or educational contexts. Future research should examine the applicability of similar interventions across diverse populations and settings. In addition, future studies should further investigate the mechanisms underlying the observed effects, including improvements in emotional regulation, attentional processes, and interpersonal functioning (Hölzel et al., 2011 ; Shapiro et al., 2006 ). Examining the long-term sustainability of intervention effects beyond the current follow-up period, as well as the potential role of continued practice or booster sessions in maintaining gains over time, would also be valuable. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this study is among the first to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among teachers in the Arab education system in Israel. The findings indicate that participation in the program was associated with significant improvements across multiple dimensions of teachers’ psychological and professional functioning, including reductions in stress and burnout, as well as increases in mindfulness, self-compassion, empathy, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching. These results suggest that mindfulness- and compassion-based practices, often conceptualized as individually oriented interventions, can be effectively implemented within collectivistic cultural contexts. Despite the strong collectivist orientation of Arab society, the findings indicate that such interventions may support both intrapersonal and interpersonal capacities among teachers. The study also offers both theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it adds to the growing body of literature supporting the cultural adaptability of MBIs beyond Western contexts. Practically, the findings highlight the potential of teacher-focused mindfulness training as a scalable approach to promoting teacher well-being and supporting classroom processes. Importantly, the implementation of the program within the framework of teachers’ professional development, rather than relying solely on external facilitators, suggests a feasible pathway for integrating mindfulness-based approaches into educational systems. Future research should further examine how such programs can be sustainably embedded within school structures to support teachers and, indirectly, student outcomes over time. Declarations Author Contribution This is a singular author and conducted =ucted the study alone Data Availability Data will be available upon request from the corresponding author References Abu-Asba, H. (2007). Ha-ḥinukh ha-‘Aravi be-Yisrael: Dilemot shel mi‘ut le’umi [Arab education in Israel: Dilemmas of a national minority] . The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies. Avola, E., Soini, T., Jyrkiäinen, A., & Pentikäinen, V. (2025). Interventions to teacher well-being and burnout: A scoping review. Educational Psychology Review , 37 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2 Barata-Gonçalves, M., Pires, L., Carona, C., Damas, C. A. M., de Coimbra, C., Lima, D., de Frank, M. P., J., & de Oliveira, A. L. (2024). Psychometric properties of the mindfulness in teaching scale in a sample of Portuguese teachers. Mindfulness , 15 (2), 447–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-023-02283-5 Beames, J. R., Spanos, S., Roberts, A., McGillivray, L., Li, S., Newby, J. M., O’Dea, B., & Werner-Seidler, A. (2023). Intervention programs targeting the mental health, professional burnout, and/or wellbeing of school teachers: Systematic review and meta-analyses. Educational Psychology Review , 35 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09720-w Berkovich-Ohana, A., Lavy, S., & Shanboor, K. (2020). Effects of a mindfulness intervention among Arab teachers are mediated by decentering: A pilot study. Frontiers in Psychology , 11 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.542986 Brown, J. L., Jennings, P. A., Rasheed, D., Cham, H., Fosco, S. L. D., Frank, J., Davis, R., & Greenberg, M. T. (2023). Direct and moderating impacts of the CARE mindfulness-based professional learning program for teachers on children’s outcomes. Applied Developmental Science , 29 (1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2023.2268327 Buskila, Y., & Chen-Levi, T. (2021a). The role of authentic school leaders in promoting teachers’ well-being. Athens Journal of Education , 8 (2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.8-2-3 Buskila, Y., & Chen-Levi, T. (2021b). Intense teaching schedule in Israeli teachers. Athens Journal of Education , 8 (3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.8-3-5 Cheng, X., Zhang, H., Cao, J., & Ma, Y. (2021). The effect of mindfulness-based programs on psychological distress and burnout in kindergarten teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal , 50 (7), 1197–1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01254-6 Demmin, D., Silverstein, S. M., & Shors, T. J. (2022). Meditation and exercise improved teachers’ mental health. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , 16 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.847301 Dunn, M. S., & Larson, K. E. (2023). Mindful educators: Compassion and adaptability. International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research , 22 (2), 358–372. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.2.20 Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning. Child Development , 82 (1), 405–432. Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., Bonus, K., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Mindfulness for teachers. Mind Brain and Education , 7 (3), 182–195. Haidar, A., Kalantzis, M. A., Nallajerla, M., Vela, A., Adler, S. R., & Burnett-Zeigler, I. (2024). Cultural adaptation of mindfulness interventions. Global Advances in Integrative Medicine and Health , 13 . He, J., Iskhar, S., Yan, Y., & Aisuluu, M. (2023). Teacher well-being and mindfulness. Frontiers in Psychology , 14 . Hidajat, T., Edwards, E., Wood, R., & Campbell, M. (2023). Mindfulness-based interventions for teachers: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education , 134 , Article 104303. Hölzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., & Ott, U. (2011). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 6 (6), 537–559. Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom. Review of Educational Research , 79 (1), 491–525. Klingbeil, D. A., & Renshaw, T. L. (2018). Mindfulness interventions for teachers. School Psychology Quarterly , 33 (4), 501–511. Lensen, J. H., Stoltz, S., Kleinjan, M., Kraiss, J. T., Scholte, R. H. J., & Speckens, A. (2024). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for teachers. Frontiers in Education , 9 . Liu, D., & Du, R. (2024). Mindfulness and teacher burnout. Frontiers in Psychology , 15 . Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology , 52 , 397–422. Meiklejohn, J., Phillips, C., Freedman, M. L., Griffin, M. L., Biegel, G., Roach, A., Frank, J., Burke, C., Pinger, L., Soloway, G., & Isberg, R. (2012). Integrating mindfulness into education. Mindfulness , 3 , 291–307. Neff, K. D. (2003). Self-compassion. Self and Identity , 2 (2), 85–101. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88 (5), 879–903. Roeser, R. W., Mashburn, A. J., Skinner, E. A., et al. (2021). Mindfulness training improves teachers’ well-being. Journal of Educational Psychology , 114 (2), 408–425. Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology , 62 (3), 373–386. Silva-Paz, R. J., & Davidovitch, N. (2025). Mindfulness and cultural adaptation. Frontiers in Psychology , 16 . Taylor, S. G., Roberts, A. M., & Zarrett, N. (2021). Brief mindfulness intervention for teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education , 100 , Article 103284. Yin, P., Huang, C., Xiaochun, Y., Yang, F., Qiu, S., & Song, D. (2023). Mindfulness and job satisfaction in teachers. Zadok-Gurman, T., Jakobovich, R., Dvash, E., Zafrani, K., Rolnik, B., Ganz, A. B., & Lev-Ari, S. (2021). Stress reduction intervention in teachers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18 (7), Article 3689. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9441671","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":634818490,"identity":"f00ede81-d34f-407f-aca3-6965ead3815d","order_by":0,"name":"giana khalifa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Al-Qasemi Academic College of Education","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"giana","middleName":"","lastName":"khalifa","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-16 19:38:42","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108637434,"identity":"61d4b407-a40d-40d6-b306-db9ce3aaa08c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-06 18:27:03","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":124760,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9441671/v1/e0c475276f28f0c4ff919997.png"},{"id":108637440,"identity":"50d5e212-fa58-4adb-b344-3c8c53f6397d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-06 18:27:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":589611,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9441671/v1/b7ec9482-0f54-4feb-9a5b-fbca935918de.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Impact of a Mindfulness- and Compassion-Based Intervention on Stress, Burnout, and Psychological Well-Being Among Arab Teachers in Israel: A Longitudinal Study","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eTeaching is a demanding profession, marked by continuous cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal challenges that can adversely affect teachers\u0026rsquo; psychological health and professional effectiveness (Herman et al., 2020; Jennings \u0026amp; Greenberg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers are responsible for instructional duties, classroom management, administrative tasks, and cultivating relationships with students, parents, and staff. They often work in environments with limited resources and high expectations (Hakanen et al., 2006). These demands often lead to high levels of occupational stress and burnout, which are associated with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced feelings of accomplishment (Maslach et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Shen et al., 2015). Consequently, interventions that can effectively improve teachers\u0026rsquo; well-being and professional efficacy are needed (Fernet et al., 2012).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne potentially effective strategy is implementing mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs). Mindfulness is defined as nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 2003). Mindfulness training can improve emotional regulation, attention control, cognitive flexibility, and self-awareness while reducing stress and anxiety (H\u0026ouml;lzel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Meiklejohn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). These beneficial effects are underpinned by mechanisms including attention regulation, bodily awareness, emotional regulation, and shifts in self-perception (H\u0026ouml;lzel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Initially designed for clinical environments, MBIs have been adapted for educational settings, showing positive outcomes for educators and learners (Meiklejohn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Shapiro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, despite the growing body of scholarly research on MBIs, longitudinal studies examining the longevity of intervention effects over an extended period are lacking (Cheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Most studies have used short-term designs, which limit the ability to evaluate the sustainability of intervention outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsidering these deficiencies, this study explores the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-oriented intervention for Arab educators in Israel. Specifically, the study aims to analyze changes over time in educators\u0026rsquo; perceived stress, burnout, mindfulness, self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction. Using a multidimensional, longitudinal approach, this study aims to provide culturally relevant, empirically substantial evidence regarding educator well-being and professional efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Literature Review","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTeacher Stress and Burnout\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeaching entails significant demands, characterized by persistent cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal challenges, thereby placing educators at an elevated risk for experiencing stress and burnout (Herman et al., 2020; Jennings \u0026amp; Greenberg, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Kyriacou, 2001). Burnout, comprising aspects such as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment, has been repeatedly associated with adverse consequences for both educators and learners (Maslach et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Shen et al., 2015). Furthermore, factors such as excessive workload, temporal constraints, and intricate classroom obligations further intensify the psychological strain experienced by teachers (Hakanen et al., 2006; Skaalvik \u0026amp; Skaalvik, 2017). These challenges underscore the necessity of identifying efficacious interventions that promote teachers’ well-being and professional efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMindfulness-Based Interventions in Education\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA growing body of research has identified MBIs as a potentially effective strategy for fostering teacher well-being. Mindfulness is conceptualized as a nonjudgmental awareness of experiences occurring in the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 2003). Mindfulness facilitates emotional regulation, attentional control, and cognitive flexibility while concomitantly reducing stress and anxiety (Hölzel et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Meiklejohn et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Tang et al., 2015). In educational settings, MBIs have been adopted by educators at an increasing rate. They can lead to significant reductions in stress and burnout, as well as improvements in psychological well-being (Flook et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Hidajat et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Klingbeil \u0026amp; Renshaw, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Systematic reviews further corroborate the efficacy of these interventions; however, they also reveal variability in outcomes and methodological constraints across the studies reviewed (Avola et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Beames et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Emerson et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCompassion and Self-Compassion in Teaching\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to mindfulness, compassion and self-compassion have been identified as pivotal psychological resources for educators. Self-compassion, defined as a benevolent and impartial attitude toward oneself during challenging experiences, has been linked to reduced stress and burnout and increased emotional resilience (MacBeth \u0026amp; Gumley, 2012; Neff, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Yin et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Compassion-based methodologies also enhance interpersonal functioning, as evidenced by increased empathy and improved teacher–student dynamics (Dunn \u0026amp; Larson, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Jennings, 2015). Additionally, the integration of mindfulness and compassion can amplify intervention effects by addressing both intrapersonal and interpersonal facets of educator functioning (Conversano et al., 2020; Roeser et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMechanisms of Change in Mindfulness-Based Interventions\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe efficacy of MBIs is supported by numerous psychological mechanisms. These mechanisms include enhancements in emotion regulation, attentional capacities, and decentering, which facilitate more adaptive responses to stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Gu et al., 2015; Hölzel et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Empirical investigations have also illuminated the importance of mindfulness facets, such as acting with awareness and non-reactivity, in alleviating occupational stress and emotional exhaustion (Lensen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, mindfulness has been associated with psychological flexibility and well-being, thereby reinforcing its role as a protective factor in high-demand professions, including teaching (He et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Kashdan \u0026amp; Rottenberg, 2010; Liu \u0026amp; Du, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCultural Context: Arab Teachers in Israel\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eArab teachers in Israel work within a distinctive sociocultural and educational context that may shape both the sources of occupational stress and the ways in which well-being interventions are experienced. The Arab education system in Israel has been described as operating under structural and contextual constraints, including limited resources and broader sociopolitical pressures, that can intensify professional demands (AbuʽAsba, 2007; Samoha, 2001). In addition, collectivistic cultural norms may influence teachers’ help-seeking patterns, coping strategies, and the salience of relational and community-oriented aspects of professional functioning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin this context, mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions may be particularly relevant because they target core processes associated with stress regulation and interpersonal functioning. Mindfulness training has been linked to improvements in emotion regulation, attention, and decentering, mechanisms that support more adaptive responses to stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Gu et al., 2015; Hölzel et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, specific mindfulness facets, such as acting with awareness and non-reactivity, have been associated with lower occupational strain and burnout-related symptoms (Lensen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Mindfulness has also been linked to psychological flexibility and well-being, reinforcing its potential as a protective factor in high-demand professions, such as teaching (He et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Kashdan \u0026amp; Rottenberg, 2010; Liu \u0026amp; Du, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Importantly, emerging evidence suggests that mindfulness-based programs can be adapted across cultures when delivered in contextually sensitive ways, highlighting their potential applicability within the Arab education system in Israel (Silva-Paz \u0026amp; Davidovitch, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Gaps and the Need for Longitudinal Studies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the growing body of research on MBIs, several important gaps remain. Many studies rely on short-term designs and self-report measures, and longitudinal research examining intervention effects is lacking, limiting the ability to draw conclusions regarding the long-term effectiveness of such interventions (Hidajat et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This limitation is particularly evident in studies conducted within culturally underrepresented populations, such as Arab teachers in Israel (Cheng et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Silva-Paz \u0026amp; Davidovitch, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, research has often focused on a relatively narrow range of outcomes, primarily stress reduction, while neglecting broader dimensions of teacher well-being and professional functioning. Therefore, adopting a more comprehensive, teacher-centered perspective that includes constructs such as mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching is necessary (Beames et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Roeser et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eThe Present Study\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn response to these gaps, this study examines the impact of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among Arab teachers in Israel using a longitudinal design with repeated measurements and a comparison group. By adopting a multidimensional approach to teacher well-being that includes stress, burnout, mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, anxiety, and job satisfaction, this study aims to provide culturally grounded and empirically robust evidence regarding the effectiveness of such interventions across multiple domains of teachers’ psychological and professional functioning.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eRationale for the Study\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe rationale for this study is grounded in three interconnected gaps in the literature. First, the need for further research on mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions in culturally underrepresented contexts, particularly within the Arab education system in Israel, is clear (Lensen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Silva-Paz \u0026amp; Davidovitch, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Second, moving beyond narrow outcome models and examining a broader range of teacher-centered variables, including not only stress and burnout but also mindfulness, empathy, self-compassion, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, is necessary (Beames et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Roeser et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Third, longitudinal evidence clarifying which intervention effects are sustained over time is lacking.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccordingly, the present study evaluates the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention using a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. By doing so, it seeks to provide more precise and contextually relevant evidence regarding the dimensions of teacher well-being and professional functioning that are most responsive to this type of intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Purpose\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe purpose of this study is to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention on Arab teachers in Israel. Specifically, the study investigates whether participation in the program is associated with longitudinal changes in teachers’ perceived stress, burnout, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, the study aims to provide contextually grounded evidence regarding the applicability of mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development within a non-Western educational setting that has received limited scholarly attention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Novelty\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study advances the literature in three key ways. First, it addresses an important contextual gap by examining a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among Arab teachers in Israel, a culturally distinct and underrepresented population in mindfulness research. Second, it extends prior work by adopting a comprehensive, teacher-centered framework that assesses multiple domains of psychological and professional functioning, including burnout, mindfulness (including interpersonal mindfulness in teaching), self-compassion, empathy, anxiety, and job satisfaction. Third, by employing a longitudinal design with measurements at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up, the study contributes evidence regarding both immediate outcomes and the sustainability of intervention effects over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study is guided by the following research questions:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo what extent does participation in a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention reduce perceived stress among Arab teachers in Israel over time?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo what extent does participation in the intervention reduce teacher burnout over time?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e To what extent does participation in the intervention enhance teachers’ mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy over time?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo what extent is participation in the intervention associated with changes in teachers’ anxiety and job satisfaction over time?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eHypotheses\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on prior research on mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions and the conceptual integration of mindfulness and compassion in the present program, the following hypotheses were formulated:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH1: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater decrease in teachers’ perceived stress over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH2: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater decrease in teachers’ burnout over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH3: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ overall mindfulness over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e H4: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in interpersonal mindfulness in teaching over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH5: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ self-compassion over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH6: Participation in the intervention will be associated with a greater increase in teachers’ empathy over time compared with participation in the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH7 (exploratory): Participation in the intervention may be associated with changes in teachers’ anxiety over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eH8 (exploratory): Participation in the intervention may be associated with changes in teachers’ job satisfaction over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e "},{"header":"Method","content":"\u003ch2\u003eResearch Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a quantitative quasi-experimental longitudinal design to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention with Arab teachers in Israel. The design included an intervention group and a comparison group, with repeated measurements collected at three time points: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up. Random assignment was not feasible, as the professional development programs implemented in each school were determined by school principals. Accordingly, teachers in schools whose principals selected the Call to Care program were assigned to the intervention group, whereas teachers in schools whose principals selected an alternative professional development workshop served as the comparison group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in eight elementary schools within the Arab education system in Israel (Grades 4–6). Six schools participated in the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention, and two schools participated in an alternative workshop serving as the comparison condition. Teachers were recruited by principals in collaboration with school counselors, with priority given to homeroom teachers and then subject teachers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sample included 142 teachers (intervention: \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e = 111; comparison: \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e = 31) and was predominantly female (25 men, 17.9%; 115 women, 82.1%). Participants ranged in age from 26 to 63 years (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e = 39.92, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 7.51). Teaching experience ranged from 1 to 43 years (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e = 16.26, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 8.03), and tenure at the current school ranged from 1 to 43 years (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e = 11.47, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 7.73). Most participants held a bachelor’s degree (66.7%), followed by a master’s degree or higher (23.4%), and a teaching certificate (9.2%). At follow-up, data were available for 115 teachers (intervention: \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e = 90; comparison: \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e = 25).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eIntervention and Comparison Conditions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers in the intervention group participated in the Call to Care–Israel program, a mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development workshop designed to enhance awareness, emotional regulation, self-compassion, empathy, and interpersonal sensitivity. The program consisted of 12 weekly sessions and was structured around three interconnected modes of care: receiving care from others, cultivating self-care, and extending care to others. Each mode included four sessions that combined theoretical input with experiential practice. The structure and content of the Call to Care–Israel program are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;1. Throughout the program, teachers engaged in guided meditation, breathing exercises, imagery, reflective discussions, psychoeducational components, and group sharing. In addition, participants were encouraged to engage in daily home practice and to gradually integrate adapted mindfulness-based exercises into their classroom routines.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Teachers in the comparison group participated in an alternative professional development workshop titled The Classroom as a Learning Community. This program consisted of weekly sessions of approximately 2.5 h over a period of approximately two months and focused on pedagogical topics, such as differentiated instruction, active learning, classroom organization, and teacher–student interaction. Importantly, the comparison workshop did not include mindfulness, compassion-based content, or contemplative practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeek\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObjectives\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSkills\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroduction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGetting to know the teachers\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroducing the program\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSetting the rules for the training\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the causes of burnout\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeveloping burnout prevention strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiaphragmatic breathing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroduction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroducing the theoretical framework\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e“Safe place” imagery\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceiving Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroducing the concept of mindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnhancing motivation to practice mindfulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVagal breathing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceiving Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeaching about different attitudes of relation to oneself\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLearning the differences between self-esteem and self-compassion\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBrief mindfulness practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf-affirmation practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceiving Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDealing with destructive feelings\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDealing with barriers to receiving care\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeepening the practice of compassion meditation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCompassion meditation: Dear person\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceiving Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe need for receiving care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceiving care imagery\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf-Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvaluating levels of self-care\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIdentifying needs for self-compassion\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDesigning daily self-compassion practices\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMindfulness practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeditation: Self-compassion, self-affirmation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf-Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIdentifying barriers to self-compassion\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePracticing self-gratitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeveloping awareness of self-criticism\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLearning ways to combat self-criticism\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeditation: Self-acceptance, self-gratitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExtending Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntroducing the concept of radical compassion\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLearning to practice radical compassion\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExploring the benefits of giving to others\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePracticing small care gestures toward others\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeditation: From receiving to giving\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccepting challenging people\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExtending Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpathic communication\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe basis of human judgment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeditation: Empathic communication\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExtending Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding stereotyping and prejudice\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical thinking. The bystander effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical thinking practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExtending Care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDesigning a student project focusing on giving to the community\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary, reflection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApplying the tools acquired in the program in daily life\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMeasures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eDemographic Questionnaire.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA demographic questionnaire was administered to collect background information, including age, gender, marital status, education level, teaching experience, professional role in school, participation in professional training, and interest in mindfulness workshops.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWork-Related Stress.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork-related stress was measured using a 20-item questionnaire based on Bhagat et al. (1991). The scale assesses role conflict, role ambiguity, and workload using a 5-point Likert response format ranging from 1 (very slightly true) to 5 (very true). Internal consistency in the present study was satisfactory across the three measurement points (α = .76, .84, and .87).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnxiety (BSI-18).\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnxiety was measured using the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18), which includes 18 items assessing psychological distress symptoms rated on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Reliability was high across the three measurement points (α = .94, .94, and .90).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eJob Satisfaction.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eJob satisfaction was measured using the Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale (Caprara et al., 2003), which includes four items rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Internal consistency coefficients were .86, .83, and .95 across the three measurement points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eBurnout.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBurnout was assessed using a 14-item adapted version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach \u0026amp; Jackson, 1981; McCormick \u0026amp; Barnett, 2011), covering depersonalization, personal accomplishment, and emotional exhaustion. Responses were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Reliability was strong across the three time points (α = .87, .91, and .92).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEmpathy.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmpathy was measured using the Teacher Empathy Questionnaire (Chen, 2011), which includes 14 items assessing empathic concern and perspective taking on a 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was translated into Arabic for use with participants. Internal consistency coefficients were .72, .64, and .61 across the three measurements.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eMindfulness.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMindfulness was assessed using the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (Baer et al., 2006). The questionnaire includes 39 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale and assesses observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging, and non-reactivity. Two items were removed to improve reliability. Overall reliability coefficients were .79, .85, and .86 across the three measurement points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eMindfulness in Teaching.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMindfulness in teaching was measured using the Interpersonal Mindfulness in Teaching Scale (Greenberg et al., 2010), a 20-item instrument assessing mindfulness in day-to-day teaching activities and interactions. Items were rated on a 5-point scale, and ten items were reverse coded. Internal consistency coefficients were .78, .76, and .71 across the three time points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSelf-Compassion.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSelf-compassion was measured using the short form of the Self-Compassion Scale (Raes et al., 2011), which includes 12 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale covers self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, and over-identification, with six reverse-coded items. Internal consistency coefficients were .63, .72, and .71 across the three measurement points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Collection\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuantitative data were collected from teachers at three measurement points to examine changes over time associated with participation in the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention. Baseline data were collected prior to the intervention (December), post-intervention data were collected immediately after program completion (March), and follow-up data were collected six months later, at the beginning of the subsequent school year, to assess the persistence of intervention effects. At each wave, teachers completed a battery of self-report questionnaires assessing perceived stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. Data collection was conducted in eight elementary schools within the Arab education system in Israel. Teachers from six schools participated in the Call to Care intervention, whereas teachers from two schools participated in an alternative professional development workshop and served as the comparison group. Teachers were recruited by school principals in collaboration with school counselors, with priority given to homeroom teachers, followed by subject teachers. The total sample included 142 teachers (111 in the intervention group and 31 in the comparison group). At follow-up, data were available for 115 teachers (90 in the intervention group and 25 in the comparison group), due to attrition related to factors such as sabbaticals and school transitions. Prior to participation, informed consent was obtained from all teachers. The repeated-measures design enabled the examination of both immediate and longer-term changes in teacher outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuantitative analyses focused on teacher outcomes. To examine the effects of participation in the intervention over time, linear mixed models were constructed for each dependent variable. The models included measurement time (pre-, post-, follow-up), group (intervention vs. comparison), and the time × group interaction as fixed effects. Teacher gender was included as a covariate. The interaction term was of primary interest, as it tested whether changes over time differed between the intervention and comparison groups. Random effects for age, teaching experience, and school affiliation nested within group were initially specified; however, these models did not converge. Therefore, final models were estimated without these random effects. When significant interaction effects were identified, Bonferroni-corrected post hoc comparisons were conducted to examine within-group changes across measurement points. This analytic approach was applied to all outcome variables, including stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eEthical Considerations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e The study was approved by the Ethics Committee XXX and by the Office of the Chief Scientist at the XXX. Informed consent was obtained from all participating teachers prior to data collection. Participation was voluntary, and participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without penalty. All data were collected anonymously and stored securely to ensure confidentiality.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo examine differences between the two groups in the dependent measures at pretest, independent samples \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e-tests were conducted. The results indicated that the intervention group exhibited significantly lower levels of stress, anxiety, and burnout, and significantly higher job satisfaction compared with the comparison group. No significant pretest differences were found for empathy, overall mindfulness, the mindfulness subdimensions, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, or self-compassion. Baseline comparisons for demographic characteristics further showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in age, teaching experience, school seniority, gender, or educational level, indicating that the groups were broadly comparable prior to the intervention (see Tables \u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBaseline Equivalence in Age, Teaching Experience, and School Seniority Between the Groups\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntervention \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparison \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.57 (7.79)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.60 (5.97)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.94 (136)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeaching experience\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.75 (8.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.52 (6.34)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.37 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSchool seniority\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.53 (8.11)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.26 (6.34)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17 (137)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e No statistically significant group differences were found.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGender Homogeneity Between the Groups\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntervention \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparison \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18 (16.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (23.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e92 (83.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23 (76.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026chi;\u0026sup2; = 0.78, ns.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGroup Differences in Education Level at Baseline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducation level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntervention \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparison \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeaching certificate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (14.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2 (6.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37 (49.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21 (70.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaster\u0026rsquo;s degree or higher\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26 (34.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (23.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 (1.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0 (0.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026chi;\u0026sup2; = 0.60, ns.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBaseline Differences Between Intervention and Comparison Groups\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntervention \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparison \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.49 (0.45)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.88 (0.48)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.27 (140)**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnxiety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06 (0.71)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.60 (0.89)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.53 (140)**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJob satisfaction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.52 (1.24)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.76 (1.60)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;2.83 (140)**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBurnout\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.62 (0.73)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.12 (0.73)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.36 (140)**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEmpathy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.74 (0.47)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.79 (0.49)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52 (139)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.31 (0.36)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.31 (0.37)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObserving\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.17 (0.57)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.20 (0.54)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescribing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.40 (0.64)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.51 (0.52)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActing with awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.61 (0.61)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49 (0.49)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.94 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-judging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.30 (0.52)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.23 (0.62)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.63 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-reactivity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.98 (0.54)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.01 (0.59)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMindfulness in teaching\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.59 (0.43)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52 (0.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.72 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelf-compassion\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.37 (0.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.29 (0.37)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;0.94 (140)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Higher scores indicate higher levels of each construct.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMixed-model analyses revealed significant interactions between group and time for stress, burnout, empathy, overall mindfulness, observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. By contrast, the interaction between time and group was not significant for anxiety, job satisfaction, or non-judging. The effects of time, group, and the interaction between time and group are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThe Analysis of Covariance Results for the Post-intervention Measurement, Controlling for Baseline Scores, Age, and Teaching Seniority.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroup effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;30.28, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnxiety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.34, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJob satisfaction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.25, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBurnout\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.86, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEmpathy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;21.02, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMindfulness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;42.11, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObserving\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.36, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .008\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescribing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;24.35, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActing with awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34.35, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-judging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.82, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-reactivity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13.16, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInterpersonal mindfulness in teaching\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;25.21, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelf-compassion\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 131)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.85, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(a) shows post hoc comparisons for stress. Post hoc analyses revealed a significant reduction in stress in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.424, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.231, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.655, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). In the comparison group, the decrease from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.214) and the change from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.108) were not significant, whereas the reduction between pre-measurement and follow-up reached significance (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.322, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .005). Thus, although stress declined in both groups over time, the reduction was larger and more consistent in the intervention group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(b\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e, anxiety levels decreased over time in both groups. The analyses revealed a significant main effect of group and of time; however, the interaction between time and group was not significant. These findings indicate that although anxiety declined throughout the study period, the pattern of change did not differ significantly between the intervention and comparison groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(c) presents the job satisfaction scores. The analysis revealed a significant main effect of group, whereas neither the main effect of time nor the interaction between time and group reached statistical significance. As can be seen in the figure, job satisfaction remained relatively stable throughout the study period in both groups, indicating that participation in the intervention was not associated with a significant change in job satisfaction over time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs shown in Fig. 1(d), post hoc analyses revealed a significant reduction in burnout in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.526, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.318, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.844, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). By contrast, no significant changes were observed in the comparison group across any of the three measurement intervals. These findings indicate that burnout decreased over time, with a substantially greater and more consistent reduction in the intervention group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(e) shows post hoc comparisons for empathy. The analysis revealed a significant interaction between time and group. Post hoc analyses indicated that no significant changes in empathy occurred in the comparison group across any of the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated a significant increase in empathy from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.183, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), whereas the increase from post-measurement to follow-up was not significant (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.091, n.s.). Nevertheless, the overall increase from pre-measurement to follow-up was significant (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.274, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(f), post hoc analyses revealed a significant increase in overall mindfulness in the intervention group from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.370, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.232, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.602, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). No significant changes were observed in the comparison group across any measurement interval. Thus, overall mindfulness increased steadily across all three time points in the intervention group only.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(g) presents the scores of the observing dimension of mindfulness. Post hoc analyses revealed no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases in observing from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.330, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.324, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.654, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(h), a similar pattern was obtained for the describing dimension of mindfulness. No significant changes were found in the comparison group, whereas the intervention group showed significant increases from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.437, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.244, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.680, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(i) shows the scores of the acting with awareness dimension of mindfulness. In the comparison group, the change from pre- to post-measurement was not significant (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.207), whereas the increase from post-measurement to follow-up reached significance (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.329, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05); however, the overall difference between pre-measurement and follow-up was not significant (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.122). By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant and continuous increases across all measurement intervals: from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.370, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.205, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.574, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy contrast, no significant effects were found for the dimension of non-judging, as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(j). The analysis showed no significant main effect of group, no significant main effect of time, and no significant interaction between time and group. As can be seen in the figure, non-judging remained stable throughout the study period in both groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(k), post hoc analyses for non-reactivity revealed no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.387, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.169, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.557, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1(l) shows the scores of interpersonal mindfulness in teaching. Post hoc comparisons indicated no significant changes in the comparison group across the measurement intervals. By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant increases from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.250, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.151, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.402, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). These findings indicate that interpersonal mindfulness in teaching increased significantly in the intervention group only.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, Fig.\u0026nbsp;1(m\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e presents self-compassion scores. In the comparison group, no significant change was observed from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.072), although a significant increase was found from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.257, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05); however, the overall difference between pre-measurement and follow-up was not significant (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.185). By contrast, the intervention group demonstrated significant and continuous increases across all measurement intervals: from pre- to post-measurement (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.383, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), from post-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.263, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and from pre-measurement to follow-up (\u003cem\u003em.d.\u003c/em\u003e = 0.646, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGiven that baseline differences were identified for several variables, additional analyses of covariance were conducted to examine whether the observed post-intervention differences could be attributed to the pre-existing group differences rather than to the intervention. These analyses compared the groups at the post-intervention measurement while controlling for baseline scores, age, and teaching seniority. As presented in Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, the analysis of covariance results were consistent with the primary analysis results. Significant adjusted group effects were found for stress, anxiety, job satisfaction, burnout, empathy, overall mindfulness, observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, and self-compassion. The only variable that did not show a significant adjusted group difference was non-judging. Overall, these findings strengthen confidence in the robustness of the intervention effects and suggest that the observed differences are unlikely to be attributable to baseline disparities between the groups.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicate that the mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention was most effective in domains closely related to teachers\u0026rsquo; emotional regulation and professional coping, including stress, burnout, mindfulness, interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy. These results are consistent with prior research showing that MBIs tend to produce stronger effects on occupational strain and internal regulatory capacities than on broader or more distal indicators of well-being (Beames et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Flook et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Hidajat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Klingbeil \u0026amp; Renshaw, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Importantly, the present study extends this literature by demonstrating that these effects were not only immediate but also largely sustained over time within a culturally underrepresented context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe reduction in stress and burnout represents one of the most robust findings of the study. This pattern aligns with previous research suggesting that mindfulness interventions help teachers respond to professional demands with greater emotional balance and reduced reactivity (Cheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Flook et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Lensen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Taylor et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, the magnitude and consistency of the effects observed here may reflect the integrated nature of the program, which combined mindfulness and compassion and emphasized repeated practice over time. This finding supports theoretical perspectives suggesting that interventions addressing both attentional and relational processes may be particularly well suited to the emotional demands of teaching (Dunn \u0026amp; Larson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Roeser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed increases in overall mindfulness and in specific facets\u0026mdash;observing, describing, acting with awareness, and non-reactivity\u0026mdash;are also consistent with existing theoretical models. Research has emphasized that mindfulness training enhances attentional control, awareness of internal experience, and the capacity to pause before reacting under stress (Berkovich-Ohana et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; H\u0026ouml;lzel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Shapiro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). The present findings further suggest that improvements in acting with awareness and non-reactivity may be especially relevant for reducing occupational stress and supporting adaptive classroom functioning (Lensen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In this sense, the intervention appears to have strengthened both general mindfulness and the specific capacities most directly linked to professional practice.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy contrast, the absence of a significant effect on the non-judging facet highlights the multidimensional nature of mindfulness. This finding suggests that not all components of mindfulness are equally responsive to intervention and that some aspects\u0026mdash;particularly those involving deep-seated evaluative tendencies\u0026mdash;may require more intensive or prolonged practice. This interpretation is consistent with previous studies reporting differential responsiveness across mindfulness facets (Beames et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Klingbeil \u0026amp; Renshaw, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), and it contributes to a more nuanced understanding of how mindfulness develops among teachers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe increase in self-compassion is theoretically meaningful, as self-compassion has been identified as a key protective factor against burnout and emotional exhaustion in educators. This result aligns with prior research linking self-compassion to resilience, reduced self-criticism, and more adaptive coping (Neff, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Yin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). It also supports the view that compassion-based components may deepen the impact of mindfulness interventions by shaping how individuals relate to their own distress (Conversano et al., 2020; Roeser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In the present study, this may help explain the sustained reductions in burnout, suggesting that teachers became both more attentive to their experiences and more supportive toward themselves.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe positive effects on empathy and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching further indicate that the intervention influenced both intrapersonal and interpersonal domains. This finding is consistent with research suggesting that mindfulness and compassion enhance teachers\u0026rsquo; attunement to students and improve the quality of classroom interactions (Brown et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Dunn \u0026amp; Larson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Roeser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The observed improvements in interpersonal mindfulness in teaching are particularly important, as they suggest that the effects of the intervention extended beyond internal psychological processes to teachers\u0026rsquo; professional interactions, thereby strengthening its practical educational relevance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, the absence of significant effects on anxiety and job satisfaction warrants careful consideration. Although some studies have reported reductions in anxiety following mindfulness interventions (Cheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Demmin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), findings in this domain are often less consistent than those for stress and burnout (Beames et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Hidajat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Anxiety may be influenced by broader personal and contextual factors that are not directly addressed by school-based interventions. Similarly, job satisfaction is likely shaped by structural conditions, such as workload, organizational climate, and educational policy, which are not easily modified through mindfulness training alone (Buskila \u0026amp; Chen-Levi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021b\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, the absence of change in these variables is theoretically plausible rather than contradictory.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn important contribution of the present study is its focus on Arab teachers in Israel, a population that has received limited attention in the mindfulness literature. The findings support the view that MBIs can be culturally adaptable when implemented in contextually sensitive ways (Haidar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Silva-Paz \u0026amp; Davidovitch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the results suggest that the core mechanisms of mindfulness, such as emotional regulation and decentering, may operate across cultural contexts, particularly when compassion and relational elements are explicitly integrated (Berkovich-Ohana et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the quasi-experimental design limits causal inference, as participants were not randomly assigned to conditions. Second, the study did not include direct measures of implementation fidelity, dosage, or teacher engagement in the program, making it difficult to determine the extent to which variations in implementation influenced the outcomes. Future research should address these limitations by employing randomized designs and incorporating detailed assessments of implementation processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the findings provide robust support for the effectiveness of mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions in enhancing teachers\u0026rsquo; emotional regulation and professional functioning. In addition, they highlight that intervention effects are selective rather than universal, with stronger impacts on stress-related and relational outcomes than on broader evaluative constructs. By identifying areas in which such interventions are most effective, the study contributes to a more precise and theoretically grounded understanding of how mindfulness and compassion can support teacher well-being in diverse educational contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations and Directions for Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations of the present study should be acknowledged. First, the study employed a quasi-experimental design in which group allocation was not randomized but determined by school principals. This may have introduced selection bias and limits the ability to draw firm causal conclusions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, although longitudinal data were collected at three time points, the study relied exclusively on self-report measures. Consequently, the findings may be influenced by common method bias and social desirability effects (Podsakoff et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). To strengthen the validity of the findings, future research would benefit from incorporating additional data sources, such as observational measures, peer reports, or physiological indicators.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, although teachers were encouraged to engage in regular mindfulness practice, the study did not include systematic monitoring of practice frequency, adherence, or fidelity to the intervention protocol. Given that implementation quality and fidelity are critical determinants of intervention effectiveness (Durlak et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), future studies should include detailed assessments of these factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFourth, baseline differences were identified between the intervention and comparison groups for several variables. Although additional analyses controlling for these differences supported the robustness of the findings, future studies employing randomized controlled designs are needed to strengthen causal inference.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the study was conducted within the Arab education system in Israel, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other cultural or educational contexts. Future research should examine the applicability of similar interventions across diverse populations and settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, future studies should further investigate the mechanisms underlying the observed effects, including improvements in emotional regulation, attentional processes, and interpersonal functioning (H\u0026ouml;lzel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Shapiro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Examining the long-term sustainability of intervention effects beyond the current follow-up period, as well as the potential role of continued practice or booster sessions in maintaining gains over time, would also be valuable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, this study is among the first to examine the effects of a mindfulness- and compassion-based intervention among teachers in the Arab education system in Israel. The findings indicate that participation in the program was associated with significant improvements across multiple dimensions of teachers\u0026rsquo; psychological and professional functioning, including reductions in stress and burnout, as well as increases in mindfulness, self-compassion, empathy, and interpersonal mindfulness in teaching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results suggest that mindfulness- and compassion-based practices, often conceptualized as individually oriented interventions, can be effectively implemented within collectivistic cultural contexts. Despite the strong collectivist orientation of Arab society, the findings indicate that such interventions may support both intrapersonal and interpersonal capacities among teachers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study also offers both theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it adds to the growing body of literature supporting the cultural adaptability of MBIs beyond Western contexts. Practically, the findings highlight the potential of teacher-focused mindfulness training as a scalable approach to promoting teacher well-being and supporting classroom processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eImportantly, the implementation of the program within the framework of teachers\u0026rsquo; professional development, rather than relying solely on external facilitators, suggests a feasible pathway for integrating mindfulness-based approaches into educational systems. Future research should further examine how such programs can be sustainably embedded within school structures to support teachers and, indirectly, student outcomes over time.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis is a singular author and conducted =ucted the study alone\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData will be available upon request from the corresponding author\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbu-Asba, H. (2007). \u003cem\u003eHa-ḥinukh ha-\u0026lsquo;Aravi be-Yisrael: Dilemot shel mi\u0026lsquo;ut le\u0026rsquo;umi [Arab education in Israel: Dilemmas of a national minority]\u003c/em\u003e. The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAvola, E., Soini, T., Jyrki\u0026auml;inen, A., \u0026amp; Pentik\u0026auml;inen, V. (2025). Interventions to teacher well-being and burnout: A scoping review. \u003cem\u003eEducational Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarata-Gon\u0026ccedil;alves, M., Pires, L., Carona, C., Damas, C. A. M., de Coimbra, C., Lima, D., de Frank, M. P., J., \u0026amp; de Oliveira, A. L. (2024). Psychometric properties of the mindfulness in teaching scale in a sample of Portuguese teachers. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(2), 447\u0026ndash;459. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-023-02283-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12671-023-02283-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeames, J. R., Spanos, S., Roberts, A., McGillivray, L., Li, S., Newby, J. M., O\u0026rsquo;Dea, B., \u0026amp; Werner-Seidler, A. (2023). Intervention programs targeting the mental health, professional burnout, and/or wellbeing of school teachers: Systematic review and meta-analyses. \u003cem\u003eEducational Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09720-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10648-023-09720-w\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerkovich-Ohana, A., Lavy, S., \u0026amp; Shanboor, K. (2020). Effects of a mindfulness intervention among Arab teachers are mediated by decentering: A pilot study. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.542986\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2020.542986\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrown, J. L., Jennings, P. A., Rasheed, D., Cham, H., Fosco, S. L. D., Frank, J., Davis, R., \u0026amp; Greenberg, M. T. (2023). Direct and moderating impacts of the CARE mindfulness-based professional learning program for teachers on children\u0026rsquo;s outcomes. \u003cem\u003eApplied Developmental Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2023.2268327\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10888691.2023.2268327\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBuskila, Y., \u0026amp; Chen-Levi, T. (2021a). The role of authentic school leaders in promoting teachers\u0026rsquo; well-being. \u003cem\u003eAthens Journal of Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 161\u0026ndash;176. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.30958/aje.8-2-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.30958/aje.8-2-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBuskila, Y., \u0026amp; Chen-Levi, T. (2021b). Intense teaching schedule in Israeli teachers. \u003cem\u003eAthens Journal of Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(3), 329\u0026ndash;344. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.30958/aje.8-3-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.30958/aje.8-3-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCheng, X., Zhang, H., Cao, J., \u0026amp; Ma, Y. (2021). The effect of mindfulness-based programs on psychological distress and burnout in kindergarten teachers. \u003cem\u003eEarly Childhood Education Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e(7), 1197\u0026ndash;1206. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01254-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10643-021-01254-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDemmin, D., Silverstein, S. M., \u0026amp; Shors, T. J. (2022). Meditation and exercise improved teachers\u0026rsquo; mental health. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Human Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.847301\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fnhum.2022.847301\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDunn, M. S., \u0026amp; Larson, K. E. (2023). Mindful educators: Compassion and adaptability. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(2), 358\u0026ndash;372. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.2.20\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.26803/ijlter.22.2.20\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDurlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., \u0026amp; Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students\u0026rsquo; social and emotional learning. \u003cem\u003eChild Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e82\u003c/em\u003e(1), 405\u0026ndash;432.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., Bonus, K., \u0026amp; Davidson, R. J. (2013). Mindfulness for teachers. \u003cem\u003eMind Brain and Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(3), 182\u0026ndash;195.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaidar, A., Kalantzis, M. A., Nallajerla, M., Vela, A., Adler, S. R., \u0026amp; Burnett-Zeigler, I. (2024). Cultural adaptation of mindfulness interventions. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Advances in Integrative Medicine and Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHe, J., Iskhar, S., Yan, Y., \u0026amp; Aisuluu, M. (2023). Teacher well-being and mindfulness. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHidajat, T., Edwards, E., Wood, R., \u0026amp; Campbell, M. (2023). Mindfulness-based interventions for teachers: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e134\u003c/em\u003e, Article 104303.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH\u0026ouml;lzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., \u0026amp; Ott, U. (2011). Mechanisms of mindfulness. \u003cem\u003ePerspectives on Psychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(6), 537\u0026ndash;559.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJennings, P. A., \u0026amp; Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom. \u003cem\u003eReview of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e79\u003c/em\u003e(1), 491\u0026ndash;525.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKlingbeil, D. A., \u0026amp; Renshaw, T. L. (2018). Mindfulness interventions for teachers. \u003cem\u003eSchool Psychology Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 501\u0026ndash;511.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLensen, J. H., Stoltz, S., Kleinjan, M., Kraiss, J. T., Scholte, R. H. J., \u0026amp; Speckens, A. (2024). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for teachers. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu, D., \u0026amp; Du, R. (2024). Mindfulness and teacher burnout. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., \u0026amp; Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e, 397\u0026ndash;422.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeiklejohn, J., Phillips, C., Freedman, M. L., Griffin, M. L., Biegel, G., Roach, A., Frank, J., Burke, C., Pinger, L., Soloway, G., \u0026amp; Isberg, R. (2012). Integrating mindfulness into education. \u003cem\u003eMindfulness\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e, 291\u0026ndash;307.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNeff, K. D. (2003). Self-compassion. \u003cem\u003eSelf and Identity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(2), 85\u0026ndash;101.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., \u0026amp; Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e88\u003c/em\u003e(5), 879\u0026ndash;903.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoeser, R. W., Mashburn, A. J., Skinner, E. A., et al. (2021). Mindfulness training improves teachers\u0026rsquo; well-being. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e114\u003c/em\u003e(2), 408\u0026ndash;425.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., \u0026amp; Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Clinical Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e(3), 373\u0026ndash;386.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSilva-Paz, R. J., \u0026amp; Davidovitch, N. (2025). Mindfulness and cultural adaptation. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTaylor, S. G., Roberts, A. M., \u0026amp; Zarrett, N. (2021). Brief mindfulness intervention for teachers. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e100\u003c/em\u003e, Article 103284.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYin, P., Huang, C., Xiaochun, Y., Yang, F., Qiu, S., \u0026amp; Song, D. (2023). Mindfulness and job satisfaction in teachers.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZadok-Gurman, T., Jakobovich, R., Dvash, E., Zafrani, K., Rolnik, B., Ganz, A. B., \u0026amp; Lev-Ari, S. (2021). Stress reduction intervention in teachers. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(7), Article 3689.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"mindfulness, compassion, teachers, burnout, stress, Arab education system","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examined a mindfulness- and compassion-based professional development program in the Arab education system in Israel, using a quasi-experimental longitudinal design. Teachers in an intervention (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;111) and a comparison group (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;31) completed questionnaires at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and six-month follow-up. Participation in the program was associated with reductions in perceived stress and burnout and increases in overall mindfulness (observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-reactivity), interpersonal mindfulness in teaching, self-compassion, and empathy. No intervention-related effects were found for anxiety, job satisfaction, or the non-judging facet of mindfulness. Analyses of covariance controlling for baseline differences supported the robustness of the findings. Overall, mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions may strengthen multiple aspects of teacher well-being and professional functioning in a collectivistic cultural context, supporting the cultural adaptability and potential scalability of such programs within educational systems.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Impact of a Mindfulness- and Compassion-Based Intervention on Stress, Burnout, and Psychological Well-Being Among Arab Teachers in Israel: A Longitudinal Study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-06 18:26:41","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9441671/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"168d1bde-fefb-4aeb-aacb-c8fb9a9e1639","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 6th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-12T12:25:41+00:00","index":20,"fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-07T15:30:50+00:00","index":19,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"198296434098860185491771744425636355128","date":"2026-05-06T08:50:35+00:00","index":18,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"239217674571856038703145045139927253159","date":"2026-05-04T15:54:08+00:00","index":16,"fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-06T18:26:42+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-06 18:26:41","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9441671","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9441671","identity":"rs-9441671","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}