View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Well-Being in Post-Primary Schools in Ireland: The Assessment and Contribution of Character Strengths

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Well-Being in Post-Primary Schools in Ireland: The Assessment and Contribution of Character Strengths
Language: English
Authors: Burke, Jolanta, Minton, Stephen James
Source: Irish Educational Studies. 2019 38(2):177-192.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2019
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Education
Secondary Education
Descriptors: Well Being, Elementary School Students, Secondary School Students, Intervention, Age Differences, Gender Differences, Scores, Psychological Patterns, Personality Traits, Prediction, Resilience (Psychology), Program Development, Psychological Testing, Health Promotion, Mental Health, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: Ireland
DOI: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512887
ISSN: 0332-3315
Abstract: Enhancing the well-being of primary and post-primary students is one of the priorities of the Department of Education and Skills in Ireland. Whilst interventions are being implemented across the board, little is known about the current levels of adolescents' well-being. Drawing from research on positive education, in the current study well-being was assessed amongst 2822 adolescents, aged 12-19 in Ireland, using the PERMA profiler [Butler, J., and M. L. Kern. (2016). "The PERMA-Profiler: A Brief Multidimensional Measure of Flourishing. International Journal of Wellbeing" 6 (3): 1-48. doi:10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526] and "VIA-Youth Survey" [VIA Character (2014). http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Research-Old2/Psychometric-Data-VIA-Youth-Survey]. Mann--Whitney U-test and multiple regression analyses were conducted in the examination of age and sex differences in students' well-being scores, and the prediction of the contribution of character-strength-development to well-being. The results showed that students' well-being decreased steadily from the first year, through to the middle and senior years of post-primary school. Furthermore, in comparison to males, females reported lower levels of well-being across the board, and higher levels of negative emotions and loneliness. Finally, the underuse of character strengths predicted lower levels of well-being in Irish schools. Implications for practice include the importance of customising well-being programmes across different schools and age groups, as well as the potential for the incorporation of psychological tests to evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2019
Accession Number: EJ1215039
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFOTuMOh-UxuFrk203JsoSaAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDC0LUc5C3hQSOz46FQIBEICBmpNToyzy_GipbfTUzqR8enyHeH3NCgvU7_e771aTBi2zHFJdCv4f1S5bGNA-_IivaVJHy0-DAKOew7v_XsOzYMTzDMWUhZ90r0aEjx3DwIRnlNRt4PWVrcMpdbovWIqHQYU43_FTfheEO8xCrNEAOWhb8PgFFLDALWmrJnMaCT3duCMlnY9-nXVXFrym9tBEnVtXX2mwMN6LKJM=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0136238228;u1001jun.19;2019May07.03:07;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0136238228-1">Well-being in post-primary schools in Ireland: the assessment and contribution of character strengths </title> <p>Enhancing the well-being of primary and post-primary students is one of the priorities of the Department of Education and Skills in Ireland. Whilst interventions are being implemented across the board, little is known about the current levels of adolescents' well-being. Drawing from research on positive education, in the current study well-being was assessed amongst 2822 adolescents, aged 12–19 in Ireland, using the PERMA profiler [Butler, J., and M. L. Kern. (2016). "The PERMA-Profiler: A Brief Multidimensional Measure of Flourishing." International Journal of Wellbeing 6 (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>): 1–48. doi:] and "VIA-Youth Survey" [VIA Character (2014). ]. Mann–Whitney U-test and multiple regression analyses were conducted in the examination of age and sex differences in students' well-being scores, and the prediction of the contribution of character-strength-development to well-being. The results showed that students' well-being decreased steadily from the first year, through to the middle and senior years of post-primary school. Furthermore, in comparison to males, females reported lower levels of well-being across the board, and higher levels of negative emotions and loneliness. Finally, the underuse of character strengths predicted lower levels of well-being in Irish schools. Implications for practice include the importance of customising well-being programmes across different schools and age groups, as well as the potential for the incorporation of psychological tests to evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions.</p> <p>Keywords: positive psychology; well-being; positive education; PERMA profiler; VIA character strengths</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-2">Introduction</hd> <p> <emph>The Department of Education and Skills</emph> in the Republic of Ireland has recently introduced guidelines for mental health promotion in primary and post-primary schools (DES [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref2">13</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref3">14</reflink>]), the aims of which were to create awareness of the importance of children's well-being and to provide recommendations for well-being improvement in schools. Subsequently, the <emph>National Council for Curriculum and Assessment</emph> introduced the guidelines for well-being in the junior cycle (NCCA [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref4">46</reflink>]), encouraging schools to teach well-being to students. However, despite the provision of these basic parameters created by the government and the associated bodies, only 51.5% of Irish schools have implemented a policy relating to mental health provision, and less than 50% of schools reported that they are doing enough to support students with mental health issues (Patalay et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref5">53</reflink>]). Most importantly, very little is known about the level of well-being amongst students in Ireland, thus making it difficult to evaluate the benefits of any well-being programme implemented in schools across Ireland.</p> <p>According to the UNICEF report, Ireland ranks 22nd out of 41 countries in child's good health and well-being, with adolescent suicide rates soaring above the international average (UNICEF Office of Research [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref6">64</reflink>]). Good health and well-being are measured with such variables as the rates of neonatal mortality, drunkenness or teenage births, therefore whilst they assess some aspects of well-being, they do not report the psychological state of adolescents in Ireland.</p> <p>Amongst the aims for the large-scale <emph>Growing Up in Ireland</emph> study was the shedding of more light upon the well-being of children (ESRI [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref7">20</reflink>]). According to their report, approximately 10% of adolescents experienced symptoms of depression. At the same time, adolescents in the study overall showed an 'average' level of life satisfaction (scoring 7.2 out of 10). Whist these are useful findings, this measure of well-being was quite basic, focusing mainly on the impact of the environment on youth's well-being, or on the presence of ill-being (such as depression), rather than more complex and systemic aspects of well-being. Given this, and the general scarcity of well-being assessments amongst the Irish adolescents, a more sophisticated model of well-being was utilised in the current study in order to report on the incidents of well-being in schools in Ireland.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-3">Well-being</hd> <p>There are various definitions and approaches to well-being. For some well-being constitutes the absence of anxiety, distress (Espinoza [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref8">19</reflink>]) and other psychiatric disorders (Goldberg and Blackwell [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref9">26</reflink>]). Others view it from a developmental perspective, seeing it as both a state of well-being and a process of becoming well in various aspects of living that extends to social context, philosophical meaning-making, and individual happiness (O'Brien and O'Shea [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref10">51</reflink>]).</p> <p>Positive Psychology, which is a scientific study of optimal human functioning and its conditions (Gable and Haidt [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref11">24</reflink>]), offers yet another stance on well-being. It proposes that well-being is independent from ill-being (Huppert and Whittington [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref12">31</reflink>]). Therefore, individuals who have high levels of well-being are not merely free from psychiatric symptoms, but have also developed high levels of well-being symptoms, which vary according to the well-being theory (Diener et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref13">17</reflink>]; Huppert and So [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref14">30</reflink>]; Keyes [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref15">37</reflink>]; Seligman [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref16">61</reflink>]). According to this perspective, individuals may experience both facets simultaneously (Huppert and Whittington [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref17">31</reflink>]), thus one does not negate the other. At the same time, it has been argued that experiencing higher levels of well-being, whilst at the same time coping with the symptoms of ill-being, helps individuals build up their resilience, and thus 'bounce back' faster from experiences of adversity (Fredrickson [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref18">22</reflink>]; Jospeh [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref19">33</reflink>]). Thus, for those who purport to measure adolescent well-being, we argue that it is crucial to not only measure adolescents' so-called symptoms of depression (or lack thereof), but also to assess components of well-being (such as positive affect, or sense of achievement), which could help prevent them from experiencing more serious and long-lasting mental health issues.</p> <p>The current well-being models offered by positive psychologists are 'componential', meaning that in <emph>well-being</emph> and <emph>flourishing</emph> theories, the combination of various elements is proposed as constituting well-being (Burke [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref20">8</reflink>]; Moneta [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref21">45</reflink>]). For example, in <emph>Subjective Well-being Theory</emph> (SWB: Diener [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref22">15</reflink>]), well-being is a mixture of lower negative affect, higher positive affect, and high life satisfaction. On the other hand, in <emph>Psychological Well-being Theory</emph> (PWB: Ryff and Keyes [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref23">59</reflink>]) it is held that positive affect is <emph>not</emph> necessary for well-being; rather, what matters is the extent to which individuals develop self-acceptance, purpose in life, autonomy, positive relationships, and environmental mastery. The most recently emerging theories of well-being offer a more complex, multi-dimensional view of well-being still, which is referred to as <emph>flourishing</emph> (see Burke [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref24">8</reflink>]; Burke and Minton [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref25">10</reflink>], for reviews). Flourishing incorporates both the components of psychological and subjective well-being, as well as some additional elements.</p> <p>There are four main theories of flourishing (Hone et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref26">28</reflink>]): the <emph>Mental Health Continuum</emph> (MHC: Keyes [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref27">37</reflink>]); Huppert and So's <emph>Flourishing</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref28">30</reflink>]); the <emph>Flourishing Scale</emph> (Diener et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref29">17</reflink>]); and Seligman's <emph>PERMA</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref30">61</reflink>]) model. Of these four theories and their attendant measurements, PERMA is the most frequently utilised in schools (Seligman et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref31">62</reflink>]) and has become a symbol of 'positive education' (IPEN [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref32">32</reflink>]). Thus, many evidence-based well-being programmes in schools incorporate the PERMA model, often supplementing it with some additional elements (see White and Murray [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref33">66</reflink>]; White and Waters [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref34">67</reflink>]).</p> <p>According to the PERMA model, in order for an individual to be deemed 'well', they need to display high levels of <emph>P</emph>ositive affect, <emph>E</emph>ngagement, <emph>R</emph>elationships, <emph>M</emph>eaning, and <emph>A</emph>chievement (Seligman [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref35">61</reflink>]). Seligman argues that each one of the elements is intrinsically motivating; therefore, individuals want to use them for their own sake, rather than simply because they have to. Also, he posits that they are all quantifiably measurable, which makes them attractive to the field of positive psychology and positive education.</p> <p>To date, no study has compared well-being, as measured by PERMA, across different ages in students of the post-primary school. There is limited evidence that indeed, well-being changes across the lifespan, with higher levels being reported by older participants (Burke [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref36">8</reflink>]), however, it is unknown whether such changes occur during the turbulent times of adolescents. Similarly, no gender differences have been examined across all components of PERMA, which can help design well-being programmes more applicable to students.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-4">Positive psychology and positive education</hd> <p> <emph>Positive psychology</emph> has been defined as the science of what is right, rather than what is wrong with people (Biswas-Diener and Dean [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref37">3</reflink>]). Hence, it is viewed by its adherents as ' ...  the study of the conditions and processes that contribute to the flourishing and optimal functioning of people, groups, and institutions' (Gable and Haidt [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref38">24</reflink>], 104). Therefore, in positive psychology, there is a differentiation of (negative) pathology and (positive) mental health, and the engagement with and promotion of research and practice which contribute to the positive mental health. This is why in the current article, mental health and well-being will be used interchangeably.</p> <p>In the same vein, <emph>positive education</emph> is an application of the principles of positive psychology in educational contexts. Specifically, there is an avowed aim ' ...  to develop the skills of well-being, flourishing, and optimal functioning in children, teenagers, and students, as well as parents and educational institutions' (Boniwell [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref39">4</reflink>], 536). Therefore, positive education incorporates some of the models of well-being and flourishing into the school curriculum. Early on, a series of <emph>ad hoc</emph> positive psychology interventions (PPIs) were applied in small-scale school settings (e.g. classrooms), and where such interventions were formally evaluated, significant decreases in ill-being (such as depression and anxiety), and increases of well-being (such as resilience and positive affect) were observed (see Brunwasser, Gillham, and Kim [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref40">7</reflink>]; Kelm, McIntosh, and Cooley [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref41">35</reflink>]; Miller, Nickerson, and Jimerson [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref42">44</reflink>]; Proctor [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref43">56</reflink>]; Seligman et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref44">62</reflink>]; Shoshani and Steinmetz [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref45">63</reflink>]). Such studies were soon followed by larger scale projects incorporating positive psychology as a whole-school approach (Bailey and Challen [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>]; Boniwell and Ryan [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref47">5</reflink>]; Brunwasser, Gillham, and Kim [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref48">7</reflink>]; McGrath and Noble [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref49">42</reflink>]; Pluess and Boniwell [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref50">55</reflink>]; Seligman [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref51">61</reflink>]; Seligman et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref52">62</reflink>]; White and Murray [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref53">66</reflink>]; White and Waters [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref54">67</reflink>]; Williams [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref55">68</reflink>]). Hence, over the last two decades, there has been a rapid increase in programmes around the world which have been designed with the aim of enhancing students' well-being, which has, in turn, led to the further theoretical development of positive educational frameworks.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-5">Positive framework</hd> <p>Three main frameworks have been created for positive education (Burke [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref56">9</reflink>]). The first one was developed to incorporate the <emph>Authentic Happiness</emph> model, which was subsequently updated with additional elements, and implemented in various schools around the world (see Seligman [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref57">61</reflink>]; White and Murray [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref58">67</reflink>]). The second one – the <emph>GGS Applied Model</emph> – was created following from the implementation of positive education principles in the Geelong Grammar School in Melbourne (Norrish [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref59">49</reflink>]; Norrish et al. [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref60">50</reflink>]). The third model – the <emph>PROSPER</emph> framework – is an evolution from the original <emph>Positive Educational Practices</emph> (PEPs) framework, the aim of which was to implement well-being in education (Noble and McGrath [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref61">47</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref62">48</reflink>]).</p> <p>What all these frameworks have in common is the 'golden thread' of the PERMA model (see above) running through them. These models combine either the entire PERMA model (with its five components), or the main aspects of it, and supplement this with the character strengths education, which has now become the core component of positive frameworks and thus positive education (see below for more details). Yet, despite the prevalence of PERMA in positive education, very little is known about the students' scores on the PERMA model measure (Donlin [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref63">18</reflink>]; Kern et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref64">36</reflink>]; Schulte [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref65">60</reflink>]), and prior to the current study, no research to date had been carried out assessing PERMA measures amongst students in Ireland.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-6">Character strengths</hd> <p>Character strengths are vehicles for developing human virtues (Peterson and Seligman [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref66">54</reflink>]). According to the Values in Action (VIA) classification, there are 24 character strengths that enable individuals to develop the virtues of Wisdom, Courage, Humanity, Justice, Temperance and Transcendance (Peterson and Seligman [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref67">54</reflink>]).</p> <p>As we have seen, all of the positive education frameworks incorporated character strengths in their models (Noble and McGrath [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref68">47</reflink>]; Norrish [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref69">49</reflink>]; Seligman et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref70">62</reflink>]). Whilst character strengths are relatively stable (Ferragut, Blanca, and Ortiz-Tallo [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref71">21</reflink>]), the extent to which they have been developed can alter over the years (Peterson and Seligman [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref72">54</reflink>]). Positive education programmes that incorporated character strengths have resulted in greater school enjoyment and student engagement (Seligman et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref73">62</reflink>]). Even single interventions that create an awareness of strengths and help students use them regularly have resulted in substantial increases of students' well-being (Oppenheimer et al. [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref74">52</reflink>]). Therefore, it has been argued that the application of character strengths in educational interventions can contribute significantly to students' well-being.</p> <p>In a study with 10,000 adult participants, Hone et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref75">27</reflink>]) found that those who had awareness of their character strengths were 9.5 times more likely to psychologically flourish than those who had no awareness of their strengths. Furthermore, participants who used their strengths on a regular basis were 18 times more likely to psychologically flourish than those who did not. Therefore, we argue that it is not enough to identify students strengths but also examine their daily use, which is why the current study attempts to quantify it.</p> <p>Taking all of this into consideration, an aim for the current study is to shed light on the incidence of well-being in Irish schools, in the context of the PERMA model, which is the most prevalent model in positive education, yet does not show much evidence of being used to measure well-being in adolescents. Therefore, the first research question is: How do post-primary students in Ireland score on the PERMA well-being measure? Age and sex differences across all components of PERMA are examined, as is the contribution of character strengths to students' well-being. Thus, the second research question is: What are the age and sex differences in well-being scores of post-primary school students in Ireland?</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-7">Methodology</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0136238228-8">Participants and procedure</hd> <p>The study was carried out with 2822 participants aged 12–19 (<emph>M</emph> = 15.05, SD = 1.66), from 13 secondary schools located across all four provinces in Ireland (both rural and urban areas). However, due to data missing not at random in the 'VIA-Youth Survey' (VIA Character [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref76">65</reflink>]), responses from 46 participants were excluded from the analysis of this variable, thus the total number of participants for the strength-use assessment was 2776, aged 12–19 (<emph>M</emph> = 15.05; SD = 1.66). A strategic sampling method was applied in the recruitment of participating schools in order to ensure that all <emph>types</emph> of schools (secondary, vocational, comprehensive and community), across the four provincial regions of the Republic of Ireland (Connaught, Leinster, Muster and Ulster) were represented in the sample at similar frequencies as exist at the nationwide level. This type of strategic sampling attention was also given to the representation of schools of the various denominational affiliations (Roman Catholic, Church of Ireland, multi- and non-denominational), language use (English and Irish), and student gender (girls-only, boys-only and co-educational schools). Of the students in the sample, females represented 50.8% of the sample. The questionnaire was administered by school teachers in a paper-and-pen format, half-way through the academic year (January–February 2015). Each school was asked to distribute questionnaires to no more than 30% of its students, and to ensure that each year was represented. The current study was in itself part of a larger study examining well-being and bullying in Irish schools.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-9">Measures</hd> <p>Two measures were selected for the current analysis. The first one was the PERMA Profiler (Butler and Kern [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref77">11</reflink>]), which measures well-being. It is a 23-item scale, on an 11-point Likert scale. The range of responses vary according to each statement, some range from <emph>not at all</emph> to <emph>completely</emph>, others from <emph>never</emph> to <emph>always</emph>, yet some from <emph>terrible</emph> to <emph>excellent</emph>. In general, items are designed to elicit participants' opinions about their satisfaction with aspects of their lives, and the extent to which they feel lonely or excited. The results of PERMA are analysed by congregating means from groups of questions that create five main sub-categories: Positive Emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning and Achievement. Sample questions for each sub-category included: In general, how often do you feel joyful? (Positive emotions); How often do you become absorbed in what you are doing? (Engagement); To what extent do you receive help and support from others when you need it? (Relationships); In general, to what extent do you feel that what you do in life is valuable and worthwhile? (Meaning); How often do you achieve the important goals you have set for yourself? (Achievement). It is recommended that two additional measures are reported, i.e. Negative Emotions and Health, which refer to physical health and vitality. Sample questions for these sub-sections include In general, how often do you feel anxious? (Negative emotions); How satisfied are you with your current physical health? (Health). In addition to these, the measure used in the current study included two single items for Loneliness and Happiness, based on questions: <emph>How lonely do you feel in your daily life?</emph> and <emph>Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are?</emph> The reliability of the test in previous research has been high, ranging between ≤.74 and ≤.94 (Butler and Kern [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref78">11</reflink>]). In the current study, the Cronbach alpha scores for PERMA was ≤.88, positive emotions ≤.88, negative emotions ≤.73, engagement ≤.50, relationship ≤.70, meaning ≤.77, achievement ≤.73, and health ≤.85.</p> <p>The second measure that was used was the 'VIA-Youth Survey' (VIA Character [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref79">65</reflink>]), which is a 96-item scale with responses on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from <emph>not like me at all</emph> to <emph>very much like me</emph>. Each one of the 24 character strengths is an aggregation of four responses to statements. Sample strengths include Bravery, Creativity, Curiosity, Fairness, Forgiveness, Gratitude, Humour, Perseverance, Prudence. Sample questions include: I expect good things to come my way (Hope); If there is a chance to learn something new, I jump right in (Love of learning); I have a lot of enthusiasm (Zest); I consider every opinion before I make a final decision (Open mindedness). Past reliability tests have shown ≤.87 (VIA Character [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref80">65</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-10">Results</hd> <p>Since the well-being data were not normally distributed, Mann–Whitney <emph>U</emph>-tests were carried out to explore differences between age groups as well as males and females. However, due to the residuals being normally distributed, the multiple regression analysis was carried out to identify strength-use in the current sample.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-11">Age differences</hd> <p>Age groups were divided into Junior (aged 12–13), Middle (aged 14–16), and Senior (aged 17–19), which represent the first class students, students preparing for the Junior Certificate, and students preparing for the Leaving Certificate. Table 1 provides the details of the median values, and Table 2 provides the Mann–Whitney <emph>U</emph>-test results for differences between the age groups.</p> <p>Table 1. Median value of variables across age groups (N = 2822).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td /><td>Aged 12–13 (Junior)</td><td>Aged 14–16 (Middle)</td><td>Aged 17–19 (Senior)</td></tr><tr><td>Mdn</td><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>Mdn</td><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>Mdn</td><td><italic>N</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>PERMA</td><td char=".">7.72</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.36</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.00</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Positive emotions</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.00</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Negative emotions</td><td char=".">3.67</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">4.33</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">5.00</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Engagement</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Relationship</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Meaning</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.22</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">6.67</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Achievement</td><td char=".">7.27</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">6.75</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">6.65</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">7.84</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Happiness</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">7.00</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr><tr><td>Loneliness</td><td char=".">2.00</td><td char=".">574</td><td char=".">2.00</td><td char=".">1105</td><td char=".">3.00</td><td char=".">1143</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 2. Mann–Whitney U-test analyses for differences between age groups (N = 2822).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td /><td>Junior–Middle</td><td>Junior–Senior</td><td>Middle–Senior</td></tr><tr><td><italic>U</italic></td><td><italic>z</italic></td><td><italic>R</italic></td><td><italic>U</italic></td><td><italic>z</italic></td><td><italic>r</italic></td><td><italic>U</italic></td><td><italic>z</italic></td><td><italic>r</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>PERMA</td><td>259,198</td><td>−6.15**</td><td char=".">−0.12</td><td>223,247.5</td><td>−10.81**</td><td char=".">−0.20</td><td>535,228</td><td>−6.26**</td><td char=".">−0.12</td></tr><tr><td>Positive emotions</td><td>270,201.5</td><td>−4.99**</td><td char=".">−0.09</td><td>234,850</td><td>−9.64**</td><td char=".">−0.18</td><td>538,367</td><td>−6.07**</td><td char=".">−0.11</td></tr><tr><td>Negative emotions</td><td>278,739</td><td>−4.08**</td><td char=".">−0.08</td><td>239,422.5</td><td>−9.15**</td><td char=".">−0.17</td><td>539,695.5</td><td>−5.97**</td><td char=".">−0.11</td></tr><tr><td>Engagement</td><td>297,307</td><td>−2.11*</td><td char=".">−0.04</td><td>272,409</td><td>−5.76**</td><td char=".">−0.11</td><td>560,257</td><td>−4.64**</td><td char=".">−0.09</td></tr><tr><td>Relationship</td><td>260,326.5</td><td>−6.038**</td><td char=".">−0.11</td><td>246,304</td><td>−8.45**</td><td char=".">−0.16</td><td>581,490</td><td>−3.26**</td><td char=".">−0.06</td></tr><tr><td>Meaning</td><td>264,737</td><td>−5.57**</td><td char=".">−0.10</td><td>222,167.5</td><td>−10.94**</td><td char=".">−0.21</td><td>530,980</td><td>−6.54**</td><td char=".">−0.12</td></tr><tr><td>Achievement</td><td>278,572.5</td><td>−4.10**</td><td char=".">−0.08</td><td>251,839</td><td>−7.88**</td><td char=".">−0.15</td><td>560,160</td><td>−4.65**</td><td char=".">−0.09</td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td>292,853.5</td><td>−2.58*</td><td char=".">−0.05</td><td>243,737</td><td>−8.71**</td><td char=".">−0.16</td><td>521,102.5</td><td>−7.19**</td><td char=".">−0.14</td></tr><tr><td>Happiness</td><td>267,865</td><td>−5.32**</td><td char=".">−0.10</td><td>240,686</td><td>−9.16**</td><td char=".">−0.17</td><td>555,687</td><td>−5.00**</td><td char=".">−0.09</td></tr><tr><td>Loneliness</td><td>293,174.5</td><td>−2.58*</td><td char=".">−0.05</td><td>260,207.5</td><td>−7.08**</td><td char=".">−0.13</td><td>547,800</td><td>−5.50**</td><td char=".">−0.10</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>*<emph>p </emph>< .05. **<emph>p </emph>< .001.</p> <p>Overall, PERMA results showed a steady age-related decrease in well-being from Junior, through to the Middle and Senior groups. There were statistically significant differences between Junior (Md = 7.72) and Middle (Md = 7.36) groups (<emph>U</emph> = 259,198, <emph>z</emph> = −6.15, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.12); Junior (Md = 7.72) and Senior (Md = 7) groups (<emph>U</emph> = 223,247.5, <emph>z</emph> = −10.81, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.20); and Middle (Md = 7.36) and Senior (Md = 7) groups (<emph>U</emph> = 535,228, <emph>z</emph> = −6.26, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.12). The same pattern (of age-related decreases) were observed in the individual PERMA and supplemental components (positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning, achievement, health, and happiness). Perhaps predictably, the reverse was true (i.e. age-related increases) for measures of negative emotions and loneliness (statistically significant between age-group differences were found (<emph>p</emph> < .05). However, the effect sizes for all these differences were small.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-12">Gender differences</hd> <p>The use of Mann–Whitney <emph>U</emph>-tests revealed statistically significant differences between males (Md = 7.50) and females (Md = 7.11) in the overall PERMA scores (<emph>U</emph> = 819,987, <emph>z</emph> = −8.11, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.15). The pattern of males scoring higher than females at <emph>p</emph> < .001 continued for most of the individual variables (positive emotions, engagement, meaning, achievement, health and happiness), except for relationships, where no significant differences were found between males (Md = 7.33) and females (Md = 7.33) (<emph>U</emph> = 984,748.5, <emph>z</emph> = −.49, <emph>p</emph> = .623).</p> <p>There were also statistically significant differences between males (Md = 1) and females (Md = 3) in their respective levels of loneliness (<emph>U</emph> = 743,827.5, <emph>z</emph> = −11.76, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.22). Equally, females (Md = 5) experienced higher levels of negative emotions than did males (Md = 3.67) (<emph>U</emph> = 709,484.5, <emph>z</emph> = −13.22, <emph>p</emph> < .001, <emph>r</emph> = −0.25). Again, the effect sizes for all differences were small. Further information about the mean value can be found in Table 3 and the Mann–Whitney <emph>U</emph>-test analyses are presented in Table 4.</p> <p>Table 3. Median value of variables for males and females (N = 2822).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td /><td>Male</td><td>Female</td></tr><tr><td>Mdn</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>Mdn</td><td><italic>n</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>PERMA</td><td char=".">7.50</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">7.11</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Positive emotions</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">7.00</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Negative emotions</td><td char=".">3.67</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">5.00</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Engagement</td><td char=".">7.67</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Relationship</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Meaning</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">6.67</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Achievement</td><td char=".">7.00</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">6.33</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">7.33</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Happiness</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">8.00</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr><tr><td>Loneliness</td><td char=".">1.00</td><td char=".">1397</td><td char=".">3.00</td><td char=".">1425</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 4. Mann–Whitney U-test analyses for males and females (N = 2822).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td /><td>Males–Females</td></tr><tr><td><italic>U</italic></td><td><italic>z</italic></td><td><italic>r</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>PERMA</td><td char=".">819,987</td><td char=".">−8.11**</td><td char=".">−0.15</td></tr><tr><td>Positive emotions</td><td char=".">828,867.5</td><td char=".">−7.71**</td><td char=".">−0.15</td></tr><tr><td>Negative emotions</td><td char=".">709,484.5</td><td char=".">−13.22**</td><td char=".">−0.25</td></tr><tr><td>Engagement</td><td char=".">864,249.5</td><td char=".">−6.08**</td><td char=".">−0.11</td></tr><tr><td>Relationship</td><td char=".">984,748.5</td><td char=".">−0.49</td><td char=".">−0.01</td></tr><tr><td>Meaning</td><td char=".">789,924.5</td><td char=".">−9.51**</td><td char=".">−0.18</td></tr><tr><td>Achievement</td><td char=".">810,433.5</td><td char=".">−8.56**</td><td char=".">−0.16</td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td char=".">739,404.5</td><td char=".">−11.85**</td><td char=".">−0.22</td></tr><tr><td>Happiness</td><td char=".">858,398</td><td char=".">−6.43**</td><td char=".">−0.12</td></tr><tr><td>Loneliness</td><td char=".">743,827.5</td><td char=".">−11.76**</td><td char=".">−0.22</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>*<emph>p</emph> < .05. **<emph>p</emph> < .001.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-13">Use of character strengths</hd> <p>In order to identify the use of strengths, syntax was applied grouping all responses at value 5 for each strength, as <emph>frequently used strengths</emph>; all responses at value 3 and 4 as <emph>moderately used strengths;</emph> and all responses at value 1 and 2 as <emph>underused strengths</emph>. The values reflected the frequency with which the strengths were applied.</p> <p>Multiple regression was used to assess the ability of the three levels of strength-use to predict well-being. Preliminary analyses were conducted to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity, multicollinearity and homoscedasticity. The detailed results can be found in Table 5.</p> <p>Table 5. Summary of multiple regression analyses for predicting the levels of well-being (N = 2776).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Model</td><td>Coefficients</td><td>Frequently used strengths</td><td>Underused strengths</td><td>Moderately used strengths</td><td><italic>R</italic><sup>2</sup></td><td><italic>F</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>PERMA</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.15</td><td char=".">−.38</td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.24</td><td char=".">251.66</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.18</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.23**</td><td char=".">−.36**</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>Positive emotions</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.12</td><td char=".">−.40</td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.14</td><td char=".">155.72</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.16**</td><td char=".">−.32**</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>Negative emotions</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">−.05</td><td char=".">.30</td><td char=".">−.06</td><td char=".">.05</td><td char=".">50.38</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">−.05*</td><td char=".">.20**</td><td char=".">−.06**</td></tr><tr><td>Engagement</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.12</td><td char=".">−.25</td><td char=".">−.03</td><td char=".">.11</td><td char=".">111.27</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.19**</td><td char=".">−.24**</td><td char=".">−.04*</td></tr><tr><td>Relationship</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.17</td><td char=".">−39</td><td char=".">.00</td><td char=".">.14</td><td char=".">145.92</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.19**</td><td char=".">−.28**</td><td char=".">.00</td></tr><tr><td>Meaning</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.17</td><td char=".">−.44</td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.17</td><td char=".">184.25</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.20**</td><td char=".">−.32**</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>Achievement</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.16</td><td char=".">−.36</td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.16</td><td char=".">176.29</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.21**</td><td char=".">−.31**</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.07</td><td char=".">−.33</td><td char=".">.01</td><td char=".">.06</td><td char=".">62.31</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.08**</td><td char=".">−.23**</td><td char=".">.01</td></tr><tr><td>Happiness</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">.15</td><td char=".">−.40</td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.12</td><td char=".">119.81</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.02</td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">.16**</td><td char=".">−.27**</td><td char=".">.02</td></tr><tr><td>Loneliness</td><td><italic>B</italic></td><td char=".">−.07</td><td char=".">.34</td><td char=".">−.02</td><td char=".">.04</td><td char=".">34.32</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SE B</italic></td><td char=".">.03</td><td char=".">.04</td><td char=".">.03</td></tr><tr><td>®</td><td char=".">−.06*</td><td char=".">.17**</td><td char=".">−.02</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>*<emph>p </emph>< .05. **<emph>p </emph>< .001.</p> <p>The strength-use explained 21% of the variance in PERMA results (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref81">3</reflink>, 2772) = 251.66, <emph>p</emph> < .001). Of the three variables, only two were statistically significant with underused strengths making the largest unique contribution (beta = −.36), followed by frequently used strengths (beta = .23). All of the other variables, except for negative emotions for overused strengths (<emph>p</emph> < .05), followed the same pattern, showing statistically significant (at the <emph>p</emph> < .001 level) contributions in well-being for underused and frequently used strengths, with underused strengths (positive emotions, beta = −.32; negative emotions, beta = −.20; engagement, beta = .24; relationship, beta = −.28, meaning, beta = .32; achievement, beta = −.31; health, beta = −.23; happiness, beta = −.27; and loneliness, beta = .17) contributing more than did frequently used strengths (positive emotions, beta = .16; negative emotions, beta = −.05; engagement, beta = .19; relationship, beta = .19; meaning, beta = .20; achievement, beta = .21; health, beta = .08; happiness, beta = .16; loneliness, beta = −.06). The only exception to this general pattern was the scores for negative emotions and engagement. For negative emotions not only frequently used and underused strengths, but all three measures, were statistically significant and predicted 5% of the unique variance (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref82">3</reflink>, 2772) = 50.38, <emph>p</emph> < .001), with underused strengths recording the highest beta value (beta = .20), followed by frequently used strengths (beta = .05), and moderately used strengths (beta = .06). For engagement not only frequently used and underused strengths, but all three measures, were statistically significant and predicted 11% of the unique variance (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref83">3</reflink>, 2772) = 111.27, <emph>p</emph> < .05), with underused strengths recording the highest beta value (beta = .24), followed by frequently used strengths (beta = .19), and moderately used strengths (beta = .04).</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-14">Discussion</hd> <p>As we have seen, an analysis of the age and gender differences between well-being scores, along with the contribution of strength-use to well-being, was undertaken in the current study. It will be recalled that, firstly, the results showed that all aspects of well-being decreased with age. This included PERMA overall, and the individual and additional components of positive emotions, engagement, relationship, meaning, achievement, health and happiness scores. At the same time, negative emotions and loneliness increased with age. Past research is inconsistent about this, with some studies showing that older students report lower levels of well-being and higher levels of ill-being, and others indicating that age differences do not affect all aspects of well-being (e.g. Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref84">41</reflink>]; McLellan and Steward [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref85">43</reflink>]). In an ordinary understanding of the Irish educational context, it seems possible to suggest that this age-related reduction in student well-being may be at least partially attributable to the academic pressure students are placed under when preparing for their junior and leaving certificate examinations. Such examinations are consistently presented to the students as 'high-stake', and deemed to be particularly stressful (Banks and Smyth [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref86">2</reflink>]; Connor [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref87">12</reflink>]). However, it is also prudent to suggest that further research needs to be undertaken in order to identify (and potentially, to cross-correlate) measures of other potential developmental, psychosocial and systemic factors influencing well-being amongst post-primary school aged young people in Ireland.</p> <p>Another finding from the current study was that males' well-being was higher than females', in relation to PERMA, positive emotions, engagement, meaning, achievement, health and happiness. Also, females experienced more negative emotions and loneliness than males. This is consistent with the past research about ill-being and well-being of young people, indicating that females score lower than males in relation to subjective well-being (Gestsdottir et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref88">25</reflink>]; Lehtinen, Sohlman, and Kovess-Masfety [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref89">40</reflink>]). However, whilst the difference is prominent in late adolescence, it is reduced in young adulthood (Kling et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref90">38</reflink>]). Again, it is possible to suggest that some of these differences may be due (at least in part) to a particularly high level of negative body-image amongst adolescent females (Frost and McKelvie [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref91">23</reflink>]; Kantanista et al. [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref92">34</reflink>]; Knauss, Paxton, and Alsaker [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref93">39</reflink>]). In the gender intensification theory, it is advanced that in adolescence, males and females become more sensitive to cultural expectations of gender roles (Ruble, Martin, and Berenbaum [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref94">58</reflink>]). With this additional pressure from the media about the so-called 'ideal' body, females are disproportionately affected, resulting in internalisation that leads to higher level of body dissatisfaction, and ultimately, lower levels of reported well-being (Knauss, Paxton, and Alsaker [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref95">39</reflink>]). A direct measure of body-image was not included in the current study; however, this (i.e. a correlational study of gender, body-image and PERMA-influenced measure of well-being) may well be a fruitful line of enquiry in subsequent research. Additionally, it may also be important to consider the results of previous research, which show that gender differences are <emph>not</emph> consistent across all components of well-being (for example, it has been found that no gender differences for adolescents exist in relation to life satisfaction (Diener and Diener [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref96">16</reflink>]; Huebner et al. [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref97">29</reflink>]). Whilst direct measure of life satisfaction was not included in the current study, such a measure could also be included in the subsequent research.</p> <p>The only exception to the pattern of statistically significant differences existing between males and females in relation to many aspects of well-being in the current study was the component of relationships, where no such differences were observed. At first, this finding seems inconsistent with the past research that indicates that females tend to select a support-focused coping strategy when dealing with adversity (and therefore, seek help, advice and comfort from their social networks), more often than do males, who opt for problem-focused coping (Broderick and Korteland [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref98">6</reflink>]). This finding is consonant with reports that young men do not engage with social support when experiencing trauma, resulting in higher suicide rates amongst males in Ireland (Richardson, Clarke, and Fowler [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref99">57</reflink>]). Hence, previous research suggests that we might expect to see some statistically significant differences with respect to positive relationships and perceived support. However, the quality of relationships or social support in the <emph>context of adversity</emph> was not measured directly in the current study; rather, participants' <emph>general</emph> view of the quality of positive relationships they experience in their lives was (which showed no gender differences). Again, such measures could perhaps be included in the design of subsequent research.</p> <p>The final finding related to the contribution of strengths' use to participants' well-being; it was found in the current study that the two main contributing factors o the prediction of well-being were <emph>underused</emph> strengths and <emph>frequently used</emph> strengths, with no statistically significant contribution for <emph>moderate</emph> use of strengths. Furthermore, the underused strengths made the greatest unique contribution in explaining well-being across all measures, and not the frequently used strengths (as had been expected). This finding is in line with past research carried out in other countries, showing that indeed, using character strengths contributes significantly to students' well-being (e.g. Ferragut, Blanca, and Ortiz-Tallo [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref100">21</reflink>]; Oppenheimer et al. [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref101">52</reflink>]). However, the results of the present study are the first that indicate that it is the <emph>underuse</emph>, rather than the <emph>frequent</emph> use of strengths that contributes to well-being the most.</p> <hd id="AN0136238228-15">Implications</hd> <p>The current study provides a comprehensive outline of adolescent well-being in Ireland, using the measures associated with one of the Positive Education models. These findings can serve as (i) a comparative foundation for identifying well-being in Ireland; and, therefore, (ii) in the monitoring of the progress of well-being post well-being programmes (iii) informing the policy makers on the components that need to be incorporated in measuring and developing well-being in schools. Also, considering the significant age and gender differences in young people, the study highlights the importance of taking such differences into consideration when designing well-being programmes for students. More customised support needs to be given to students, in order to improve their well-being at a different age, or to at least ensure that the well-being is sustained as they move into their junior and leaving certificate exams. Finally, more care needs to be given by providers of well-being courses in Irish schools, so that the most effective interventions are offered to students in order to enhance their well-being, which may be different to the interventions aimed to reduce ill-being. As such, the effect of either needs to be monitored using comprehensive psychological questionnaires.</p> <p>Notes on contributors</p> <p>Dr <emph><bold>Jolanta Burke</bold></emph> is a Senior Lecturer and Associate Programme Leader of the Masters In Applied Positive Psychology and Coaching Psychology at the University of East London. Dr Burke is passionate about applying positive psychology in various fields. She has worked with businesses, such as Google, Pfizer, Cornmarket, The Big Lottery Fund, and many others, helping them use positive psychology research to help their teams and individuals in organisations thrive. As well as applying positive psychology in business, she also carried out research on applications of positive psychology in education.</p> <p>Dr <emph><bold>Stephen James Minton</bold></emph> is the Director of Undergraduate Teaching and Learning at the School of Education, Trinity College Dublin, where he is a full-time lecturer in the Psychology of Education. His areas of research interest include (i) processes of inclusion, exclusion and marginalisation in education and society, especially regarding Indigenous peoples, LGBTQ+ people, and members of alternative youth sub-cultures, and addressing prejudice in and through educational practice; (ii) aggression, including school bullying and violence, and cyber-bullying; and, (iii) most generally of all, psychosocial approaches in education.</p> <ref id="AN0136238228-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref46" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Bailey, L., and A. Challen. 2012. " The UK Penn Resilience Programme: A Summary of Research and Implementation." Psychology of Education Review 36 (2): 32 – 39.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref86" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Banks, J., and E. Smyth. 2015. " 'Your Whole Life Depends on It': Academic Stress and High-stakes Testing in Ireland." Journal of Youth Studies 18 (5): 598 – 616. doi: 10.1080/13676261.2014.992317.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Biswas-Diener, R., and B. Dean. 2007. " Positive Psychology Coaching: Putting the Science of Happiness to Work for your Clients." Journal of Positive Psychology 4 (5): 426 – 429.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref39" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Boniwell, I. 2013. " Introduction to Positive Education." In The Oxford Handbook of Happiness, edited by S. A. David, I. Boniwell, A. Conley Ayers, S. A. David, I. Boniwell, and A. Conley Ayers, 535 – 539. New York : Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref47" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Boniwell, I., and L. Ryan. 2009. SPARK Resilience: A Teacher's Guide. London : University of East London.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref98" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Broderick, P. C., and C. Korteland. 2002. " Coping Style and Depression in Early Adolescence: Relationships to Gender, Gender Role, and Implicit Beliefs." Sex Roles 46 (7): 201 – 213.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref40" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Brunwasser, S. M., J. E. Gillham, and E. Kim. 2009. " A Meta-analytic Review of the Penn Resiliency Program's Effects on Depressive Symptoms." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 77 (6): 1042 – 1054.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref20" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Burke, J. 2016a. Happiness After 30: The Paradox of Aging. Dublin : Jumpp.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref56" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Burke, J. 2016b. " Positive Psychology and Bullying: Examining Well-being, Character Strengths and Optimism Amongst Participants Involved in Bullying and Cyberbullying in Irish Schools." Unpublished doctoral diss., Trinity College Dublin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burke, J., and S. J. Minton. 2016. " Re-thinking Well-being Measures in Bullying and Cyberbullying Research." In Bullying and Cyberbullying: Prevalence, Psychological Impacts and Intervention Strategies, edited by C. McGuckin and L. Corcoran, 89 – 104. New York : Nova.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Butler, J., and M. L. Kern. 2016. " The PERMA-Profiler: A Brief Multidimensional Measure of Flourishing." International Journal of Wellbeing 6 (3): 1 – 48. doi: 10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor, M. J. 2003. " Pupil Stress and Standard Assessment Tests (SATS): An Update." Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties 8 : 101 – 107.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DES – Department of Education and Skills. 2013. " Well-being in Post-primary Schools: Guidelines for Mental Health Promotion and Suicide Prevention." <ulink href="http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/Mentalhealth/well-being%20summary.pdf">http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/Mentalhealth/well-being%20summary.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DES – Department of Education and Skills. 2015. " Guidelines for Mental Health Promotion: Well-being in Primary Schools." https://<ulink href="http://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Education-Reports/Well-Being-in-Primary-Schools-Guidelines-for-Mental-Health-Promotion.pdf">www.education.ie/en/Publications/Education-Reports/Well-Being-in-Primary-Schools-Guidelines-for-Mental-Health-Promotion.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diener, E. 2000. " Subjective Well-being: The Science of Happiness and a Proposal for a National Index." American Psychologist 55 (1): 34 – 43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diener, E., and M. Diener. 1995. " Cross-cultural Correlates of Life Satisfaction and Self-esteem." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68 : 653 – 663.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diener, E., D. Wirtz, W. Tov, C. Kim-Prieto, D. Choi, S. Oishi, and R. Biswas-Diener. 2009. " New Measures of Well-being: Flourishing and Positive and Negative Feelings." Social Indicators Research 39 : 247 – 266.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Donlin, A. A. 2015. " Vocational Identity and Well-being Among Diverse, Upper-division Health Science Undergraduates in the United States." Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 75.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Espinoza, G. 2015. " Daily Cyber Victimization Among Latino Adolescents: Links with Emotional, Physical and School Adjustment." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 3839 – 3848. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2015.04.003.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> ESRI. 2017. " Growing Up in Ireland: National Longitudinal Study of Children." <ulink href="http://www.esri.ie/growing-up-in-ireland/growing-up-in-ireland-official-publications-from-the-child-cohort/">http://www.esri.ie/growing-up-in-ireland/growing-up-in-ireland-official-publications-from-the-child-cohort/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferragut, M., M. J. Blanca, and M. Ortiz-Tallo. 2014. " Psychological Virtues During Adolescence: A Longitudinal Study of Gender Differences." European Journal of Development Psychology, doi: 10.108 /17405629.2013.876403.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fredrickson, B. L. 2001. " The Role of Positive Emotions in Positive Psychology: The Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions." American Psychologist 56 (3): 218 – 226.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frost, J., and S. McKelvie. 2004. " Self-esteem and Body Satisfaction in Male and Female Elementary School, High School, and University Students." Sex Roles 51 : 45 – 54.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gable, S. L., and J. Haidt. 2005. " What (and Why) Is Positive Psychology? " Review of General Psychology 9 : 103 – 110.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gestsdottir, S., A. Arnarsson, K. Magnusson, S. A. Arngrimsson, T. Sveinsson, and E. Johannsson. 2015. " Gender Differences in Development of Mental Well-being from Adolescence to Young Adulthood: An Eight-year Follow-up Study." Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 43 (3): 269 – 275. doi: 10.1177/1403494815569864.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldberg, D. P., and B. Blackwell. 1970. " Psychiatric Illness in General Practice. A Detailed Study Using a New Method of Case Identification." British Medical Journal 1 : 439 – 443.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hone, L. C., A. Jarden, S. Duncan, and G. M. Schofield. 2015. " Flourishing in New Zealand Workers: Associations with Lifestyle Behaviors, Physical Health, Psychosocial, and Work-related Indicators." Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 57 (9): 973 – 983.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hone, L. C., A. Jarden, G. M. Schofield, and S. Duncan. 2014. " Measuring Flourishing: The Impact of Operational Definitions on the Prevalence of High Levels of Well-being." International Journal of Well-being 4 (1): 62 – 90. doi: 10.5502/ijw.v4i1.4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huebner, E. S., R. F. Valois, R. J. Paxton, and J. W. Drane. 2005. " Middle School Students' Perceptions of Quality of Life." Journal of Happiness Studies 6 : 15 – 24. doi: 10.1007/s10902-004-1170-x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huppert, F. A., and T. C. So. 2013. " Flourishing Across Europe: Application of a New Conceptual Framework for Defining Well-Being." Social Indicators Research 110 (3): 837 – 861. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huppert, F. A., and J. E. Whittington. 2003. " Evidence for the Independence of Positive and Negative Well-being: Implications for Quality of Life Assessment." British Journal of Health Psychology 8 : 107 – 122.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> IPEN. 2017. " International Positive Education Network." <ulink href="http://www.ipositive-education.net/">http://www.ipositive-education.net/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jospeh, S. 2011. What Doesn't Kill Us: A Guide to Overcoming Adversity and Moving Forward. London : Little Brown Book Group.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kantanista, A., W. Osiński, J. Borowiec, M. Tomczak, and M. Król-Zielińska. 2015. " Body Image, BMI, and Physical Activity in Girls and Boys Aged 14–16 years." Body Image, 1540 – 1543. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.05.001.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kelm, J. L., K. McIntosh, and S. Cooley. 2014. " Effects of Implementing School-wide Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports on Problem Behaviour and Academic Achievement in a Canadian Elementary School." Canadian Journal of School Psychology 29 (3): 195 – 212. doi: 10.1177/0829573514540266.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kern, M. L., L. E. Waters, A. Adler, and M. A. White. 2015. " A Multidimensional Approach to Measuring Well-being in Students: Application of the PERMA Framework." The Journal of Positive Psychology 10 (3): 262 – 271. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.936962.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keyes, C. L. M. 2002. " The Mental Health Continuum: From Languishing to Flourishing in Life." Journal of Health and Social Behaviour 43 (2): 207 – 222.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kling K.C., J. S. Hyde, C. J. Showers, and B. N. Buswell. 1999. " Gender Differences in Self-Esteem: A Meta-Analysis." Psychological Bulletin 125 : 470 – 500.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Knauss, C., S. J. Paxton, and F. D. Alsaker. 2007. " Relationships Amongst Body Dissatisfaction, Internalisation of the Media Body Ideal and Perceived Pressure from the Media Inadolescent Girls and Boys." Body Image 4 (4): 353 – 360.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lehtinen, V., B. Sohlman, and V. Kovess-Masfety. 2005. " Level of Positive Mental Health in the European Union: Results from the Eurobarometer 2002 Survey." Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 1. doi: 10.1186/1745-0179-1-9.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu, W., J. Mei, L. Tian, and E. S. Huebner. 2016. " Age and Gender Differences in the Relation Between School-related Social Support and Subjective Well-being in School Among Students." Social Indicators Research 125 (3): 1065 – 1083. doi: 10.1007/s11205-015-0873-1.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGrath, H., and T. Noble. 2011. Bounce Back! Years 5-8: a Well-being and Resilience Program. 2nd ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW : Pearson Longman.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McLellan, R., and S. Steward. 2015. " Measuring Children and Young People's Well-being in the School Context." Cambridge Journal of Education 45 (3): 307 – 332.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miller, D. N., A. B. Nickerson, and S. R. Jimerson. 2014. " Positive Psychological Interventions in U.S. Schools: A Public Health Approach to Internalizing and Externalizing Problems." In Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, edited by M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, E. S. Huebner, M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, and E. S. Huebner, 2nd ed., 478 – 493. New York : Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moneta, G. B. 2014. Positive Psychology: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> NCCA. 2017. " Junior Cycle Well-being Guidelines." <ulink href="http://www.juniorcycle.ie/NCCA%5fJuniorCycle/media/NCCA/Curriculum/Well-being/Well-being-Guidelines-for-Junior-Cycle.pdf">http://www.juniorcycle.ie/NCCA%5fJuniorCycle/media/NCCA/Curriculum/Well-being/Well-being-Guidelines-for-Junior-Cycle.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noble, T., and H. McGrath. 2008. " The Positive Educational Practices Framework: A Tool for Facilitating the Work of Educational Psychologists in Promoting Pupil Well-being." Educational & Child Psychology 25 (2): 119 – 134.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noble, T., and H. McGrath. 2015. " PROSPER: A New Framework for Positive Education." Psychology of Well-Being Theory, Research and Practice 5 : 2.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norrish, J. 2015. Positive Education: The Geelong Grammar School Journey. New York : Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norrish, J. M., P. Williams, M. O'Connor, and J. Robinson. 2013. " An Applied Framework for Positive Education." International Journal of Well-being 3 (2): 147 – 161. doi: 10.5502/ijw.v3i2.2.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> O'Brien, M., and A. O'Shea. 2017. A Human Development (PSP) Framework for Orienting Education and Schools in the Space of Wellbeing. Dublin: NCCA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oppenheimer, M. F., C. Fialkov, B. Ecker, and S. Portnoy. 2014. " Teaching to Strengths: Character Education for Urban Middle School Students." Journal of Character Education 10 (2): 91 – 105.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patalay, P., L. Giese, M. Stanković, C. Curtin, B. Moltrecht, and D. Gondek. 2016. " Mental health Provision in Schools: Priority, Facilitators and Barriers in 10 European Countries." Child & Adolescent Mental Health 21 (3): 139 – 147. doi: 10.1111/camh.12160.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peterson, C., and M. E. P. Seligman. 2004. Character Strengths and Virtues: A Classification and Handbook. Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pluess, M., and I. Boniwell. 2015. " Sensory-Processing Sensitivity Predicts Treatment Response to a School-based Depression Prevention Program: Evidence of Vantage Sensitivity." Personality and Individual Differences 82 : 40 – 45. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.011.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Proctor, C. 2014. " Enhancing Well-being in Youth: Positive Psychology Interventions for Education in Britain." In Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, edited by M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, E. S. Huebner, M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, and E. S. Huebner, 2nd ed., 416 – 432. New York : Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richardson, N., N. Clarke, and C. Fowler. 2013. " Young Men and Suicide Project: A Report on the All-Ireland Young Men and Suicide Project." <ulink href="http://www.mhfi.org/ymspfullreport.pdf">http://www.mhfi.org/ymspfullreport.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruble, D. N., C. L. Martin, and S. A. Berenbaum. 2006. " Gender Development." In Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional, and Personality Development, edited by N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, and R. M. Lerner, 858 – 932. Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryff, C. D., and C. L. Keyes. 1995. " The Structure of Psychological Well-Being Revisited." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (4): 719 – 727.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schulte, E. C. 2016. " Yoga and Adolescent Psychological Health, Depressive Symptoms, and Flourishing." Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 76.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seligman, M. E. P. 2011. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being. London : Nicholas Brealey Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seligman, M. E. P., R. M. Ernst, J. Gillham, K. Reivich, and M. Linkins. 2009. " Positive Education: Positive Psychology and Classroom Interventions." Oxford Review of Education 35 (3): 293 – 311.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shoshani, A., and S. Steinmetz. 2014. " Positive Psychology at School: A School-based Intervention to Promote Adolescents' Mental Health and Well-being." Journal of Happiness Studies 15 (6): 1289 – 1311. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9476-1.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UNICEF Office of Research. 2017. Building the Future: Children and the Sustainable Development Goals in Rich Countries (Innocenti Report Card 14). Florence : Innocenti, UNICEF Office of Research.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> VIA Character. 2014. " VIA-Youth Survey." <ulink href="http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Research-Old2/Psychometric-Data-VIA-Youth-Survey">http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Research-Old2/Psychometric-Data-VIA-Youth-Survey</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White, M. A., and A. S. Murray. 2015. Evidence-based Approaches in Positive Education: Implementing a Strategic Framework for Well-being in Schools. New York : Springer Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White, M. A., and L. E. Waters. 2015. " A Case Study of 'The Good School': Examples of the Use of Peterson's Strengths-based Approach with Students." The Journal of Positive Psychology 10 (1): 69 – 76. doi.10.1080/17439760.2014.920408.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams, P. 2011. " Pathways to Positive Education at Geelong Grammar School: Integrating Positive Psychology and Appreciative Inquiry." IA Practitioner 13 (2): 8 – 13.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jolanta Burke and Stephen James Minton</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref99"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1215039
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Well-Being in Post-Primary Schools in Ireland: The Assessment and Contribution of Character Strengths
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burke%2C+Jolanta%22">Burke, Jolanta</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Minton%2C+Stephen+James%22">Minton, Stephen James</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Irish+Educational+Studies%22"><i>Irish Educational Studies</i></searchLink>. 2019 38(2):177-192.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2019
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Well+Being%22">Well Being</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Age+Differences%22">Age Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scores%22">Scores</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychological+Patterns%22">Psychological Patterns</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personality+Traits%22">Personality Traits</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prediction%22">Prediction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Resilience+%28Psychology%29%22">Resilience (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Development%22">Program Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychological+Testing%22">Psychological Testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Health+Promotion%22">Health Promotion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mental+Health%22">Mental Health</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ireland%22">Ireland</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512887
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0332-3315
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Enhancing the well-being of primary and post-primary students is one of the priorities of the Department of Education and Skills in Ireland. Whilst interventions are being implemented across the board, little is known about the current levels of adolescents' well-being. Drawing from research on positive education, in the current study well-being was assessed amongst 2822 adolescents, aged 12-19 in Ireland, using the PERMA profiler [Butler, J., and M. L. Kern. (2016). "The PERMA-Profiler: A Brief Multidimensional Measure of Flourishing. International Journal of Wellbeing" 6 (3): 1-48. doi:10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526] and "VIA-Youth Survey" [VIA Character (2014). http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Research-Old2/Psychometric-Data-VIA-Youth-Survey]. Mann--Whitney U-test and multiple regression analyses were conducted in the examination of age and sex differences in students' well-being scores, and the prediction of the contribution of character-strength-development to well-being. The results showed that students' well-being decreased steadily from the first year, through to the middle and senior years of post-primary school. Furthermore, in comparison to males, females reported lower levels of well-being across the board, and higher levels of negative emotions and loneliness. Finally, the underuse of character strengths predicted lower levels of well-being in Irish schools. Implications for practice include the importance of customising well-being programmes across different schools and age groups, as well as the potential for the incorporation of psychological tests to evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2019
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1215039
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1215039
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512887
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 177
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Well Being
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Age Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scores
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychological Patterns
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personality Traits
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prediction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Resilience (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychological Testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Health Promotion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mental Health
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ireland
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Well-Being in Post-Primary Schools in Ireland: The Assessment and Contribution of Character Strengths
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burke, Jolanta
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Minton, Stephen James
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2019
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0332-3315
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 38
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Irish Educational Studies
              Type: main
ResultId 1