The mindfulness field has developed well in the UK with a number of organisations offering teacher training, and an organisation BAMBA that promotes professional standards and publishes a list of over 400 mindfulness teachers that adhere to their guidelines. Yet there is a general issue among teachers that demand has largely fallen off, and the teacher training organisations are seeing a steep fall in applicants. This is in the face of a growing public awareness of mindfulness and its value, and significant uptake of mindfulness apps.
In this post I shall explore why the field needs to reexamine its stewardship to widen the adoption of mindfulness, making it more accessible while ensuring safety.
Stewardship
Stewardship of a field often falls to many organisations in the field. In the post Mindfulness – The Infinite Game, I explore a perspective on mindfulness that considers how contemporary secular mindfulness has emerged and entered the public consciousness, and suggests some changes that perspective may invite. How such changes (or similar) may arise depends very much on how the stewardship of the field develops.
The current stewardship rests with a small number of universities that offer education and training, a small number of organisations (mainly charities) that offer mindfulness teacher training, and the British Association of Mindfulness Based Approaches. The success of mindfulness in the UK is due in the most part to the considerable skills and dedication to the research and development of mindfulness based approaches.
The focus of that stewardship has largely been around high quality teacher training, research into the effectiveness of mindfulness particularly in clinical applications, and establishment of standards and training pathways. The field, however, seems to have hit a natural limit to growth with its current approach. Arguably there needs to be a development of the current stewardship to widen access to mindfulness.
Below I propose a number of areas for consideration:
- The developing of a funding model for the application of mindfulness.
- A move from intervention-centric approaches to a continuing-practice perspective.
- Training teachers to meaningfully adapt mindfulness courses to particular contexts.
- Developing a broader perspective on safety.
- Seeding the development of communities of practice.
- Embracing other approaches to mindfulness and meditation.
- Greater democracy in the ongoing stewardship of the field.
These are not exhaustive and I would contend will be considered in some form over the next decade.
Funding models
Mindfulness organisations tend to act independently in terms of funding. Most teacher training organisations are funded primarily through training fees, and operate more like businesses than charities. There is some charitable funding, but individual charities are limited in terms of the effort they can apply. They also suffer from being one step removed from direct beneficiaries of mindfulness, lacking compelling stories that attract funding. Couple this with a funding climate that is challenging, and it is clear why many organisations are struggling to survive.
As the organisations are centred mainly around teacher training, funding tends to go towards the development of curriculum. That only indirectly widens applicability of the current approaches. This is perpetuating a view that to increase accessibility we need more adaptation of existing models of teaching, which complicates the field, rather than focusing on application.
When there was significant demand for teacher training, many organisations survived very well. Now the demand has dropped, there has been a shift towards finding alternatives to offer into the limited marked. I contend that this thinking is naturally limiting development. Rather, there needs to be a shift towards stimulating the demand, which would enable the current organisations to return to economic viability.
I contend that this shift in perspective creates the need for a very different organisation in the mindfulness field in the UK, one that focusses on the application of mindfulness in all its forms and which is not directly tied to existing mindfulness organisations. Its primary purpose would be to stimulate mindfulness practice in communities. It should raise funds for the field as a whole, and distribute them in the form of grants to initiatives that would introduce mindfulness directly. In particular, it should not offer any teacher training services itself, and should not compete with existing training organisations in any way, but it may offer free-to-marked services that benefit the whole field.
I would propose that a charity is formed that is primarily a grant awarding body. Grants would only go to community projects, and could cover if necessary teacher training, but they should explicitly not go to any teacher training organisation. It would raise its funds from other grant awarding bodies, from donations and from membership fees. The membership would be completely open, and the leadership would be elected from the members. The charity would invite input from other mindfulness organisations, but control would rest entirely with the membership. The charity would remain independent from BAMBA, and embrace non-secular approaches to mindfulness where there is a clear universality in the application and an acknowledgement that mindfulness is not limited to particular religious beliefs.
The membership model and focus on application and community would be critical. It could then invite funding from a variety of sources without being seen to prefer particular approaches to mindfulness. Current mindfulness organisations could be invited to partner the charity, but have no direct say on its governance; they may offer specialist input to grant application assessment, and offer discounted rates for some of their services for successful grant applicants, but have no control over income or expenditure.
An example of a grant application may be from a school that wants to adopt mindfulness, but which has a limited budget. They might apply for a 50% grant towards training some of their teachers. The application would be scrutinised with input from relevant charities. A training organisation may offer a 10% discount, or it may have some funding options of its own to cover the balance. If there is a balance to fulfil, then the funds of the charity would be used..
Another example might be a cancer charity that wants to develop a mindfulness programme for its beneficiaries. It projects that if it is successful then they could fully fund a programme, but it needs seed funds in order to run a pilot scheme. They have a mindfulness teacher engaged, but need to pay them and to provide supervision for the teacher through the pilot programme. They apply for a 50% grant towards the pilot project. A supervision fund is available from a partner organisation, covering 50% of the supervisor costs. The balance of funds would come from the charity.
A third example might be an individual mindfulness teacher in a remote location who wants to offer training to their local community. They are on benefits and unable to work. They will offer their time for free, but need support for supervision and room hire. They apply for a 100% grant to run two mindfulness courses. The charity decides to fully support this as it is low cost and high impact.
The impact of the charity could be huge if the funding can be secured. A low membership fee (say £5 a month) could provide a reasonable base to start the charity. Donations (in money or in kind) from partner organisations could add to this. An application for funding from another grant provider (e.g. the lottery) could be a real kick start.
The field would benefit as a whole. Communities keen to explore mindfulness could have their aspirations supported. Individual teachers who want to offer something in a local community could have some financial support. Teacher training organisations should see some uptick in applications to teach. Teachers and practitioners would have the option of joining an organisation with a low barrier to entry that has a voice in the wider ecosystem that represents their concerns.
Moving from intervention-centric to continuing-practice perspectives
Mindfulness teacher-training has centred on particular mindfulness programmes (MBCT, MBSR, etc.), that have a finite value even if the benefits of a course are long term. Very little teacher-training goes into how to develop and build communities of practice. Training in an intervention is an important and necessary part of teacher training, but if the field is to continue to develop then there needs to be a shift to understanding how to develop communities of practice.
The perspective needs to shift towards how people engage initially with mindfulness (apps, yoga, drop in meditation classes, …), through a more formal course, to a community that meets to practice together, to courses and retreats that can deepen and strengthen practice. Spiritual organisations have this much better organised, and welcome practitioners at whatever stage they are in their journey. Yoga has a good open door policy.
The contention is that by focusing widely on how to engage people, ideally from a young age, in learning some of the principles of mindfulness, and facilitating continuing practice, the mindfulness ecosystem will flourish. This is more akin to spiritual traditions and even the more secular approaches to yoga, where opportunities to practice and learn are open and welcoming.
Training mindfulness teachers to adapt programmes
When I started my training as a mindfulness teacher, the main pathway on the masters programme was based on the MBSR and MBCT curriculum. MBCT is highly manualised, but MBSR has gone through phases in training that differ in emphasis on a set curriculum. I have since done training on MBCL and supervision training; supervision training is more generic. The training I have had has been largely inductive, and of a high quality, but lacking in theory and discussion of underlying principles.
I have focussed on teaching MBSR, and like most MBSR teachers I have had to adapt to different situations, producing more lightweight versions of MBSR, adapting the content to particular needs, and running ad hoc workshops to introduce mindfulness to a variety of organisations. I was blessed by having a supervisor who was very supportive of the approach I was taking. Notably, I have had no explicit training in adaptation, though I have kept abreast of research in the field.
Given the development of research, it should now be possible to develop a principles-based methodology to adapt for particular cohorts. This would mean some changes in perspective. A certified mindfulness teacher with a specialism in MBSR is different from a certified MBSR teacher. (As an IT professional, I consider myself trained in the principles of computer science and software development, and assume I can pick up any new programming language and technology based on that).
Safety
Safety is an essential underpinning of professional approaches to mindfulness. Given the focus on intensive practices the training of teachers largely emphasises caution for anyone with a vulnerability. Usually this is managed through questionnaires and interviews prior to a course. However, mindfulness can be very appropriate for someone with a vulnerability – indeed MBCT originated as a therapy for those with recurrent depression.
Over recent years there has been a broadening of the ambition of mindfulness, particularly in respect to diversity and inclusion, that invites mindfulness into areas where there are specific vulnerabilities. Neurodiversity is now being considered more thoroughly. There has been quite a lot of work on trauma sensitivity.
There is a need for a much more explicit consideration of safety in the training of teachers. Understanding what is safe and appropriate for a participant in a course, and that will depend on the course. Lighter weight, lower intensity courses may need a different approach to safety compared to a full MBSR. Teachers should understand what is appropriate for particular cohorts, and understand how to adapt trainings appropriately.
Communities of practice
Apart from within the teacher community, there is no coherent perspective from the field regarding creating and developing communities of practice. For the field to flourish, this seems like a significant omission. Some mindfulness teachers to offer regular sessions for people who have completed courses with them, but this is ad hoc.
Development of communities of practice should, I think, cover people interested in engaging with mindfulness as well as those who have done some formal courses in mindfulness. It should find ways of supporting mindfulness practitioners in sustaining a practice and deepening it. MBSR ends with a “what next” question for participants – the field really needs to provide some answers.
Embracing other approaches to mindfulness and meditation
Mindfulness and meditation practices have long histories, arguably reaching back to prehistoric times. The field seems ambivalent, at times, in terms of acknowledging its roots and acknowledging equivalent pathways to practice-based approaches. The emphasis on scientific validation of mindfulness and meditation is very important in today’s societies, but should not be seen as anti-spiritual.
There is much to be learnt from other approaches to mindfulness and meditation, not just from Buddhist origins but more widely – there are many cultural and spiritual approaches that embrace meditation practices that overlap with Buddhism or sometimes diverge quite significantly. Some of these approaches have developed and survived over many millennia.
Greater democracy in the ongoing stewardship of the field
The organisations that steward the mindfulness field are largely led by trainers, academics and researchers. Though the organisations welcomed input, there is generally only input from mindfulness teachers and not practitioners who have no interest in teaching or research. This is not a criticism of any one organisation, but a result of how the field has evolved.
The funding charity proposed above could redress some of that imbalance, but the current organisations could explore options for more input from the wider community of practitioners. This would steer the field to a broader, more inclusive approach.
Conclusion
Mindfulness and meditation have received a prominence in recent years based on proven value. The development of mindfulness teaching appears to have stalled, and there are some barriers to access that limit the ongoing development of mindfulness and meditation need to be considered in a broader way. This blog is meant as a contribution to how the field may develop