A preview of this full-text is provided by Emerald Publishing.
Content available from Health Education
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
An analysis of primary school
student’s holistic well-being
using PhotoVoice
David Cashman
School of Education, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
Wesley O’Brien
Sports Studies and Physical Education Programme,
University College Cork National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland, and
Fiona Chambers
School of Education, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
Abstract
Purpose –This study aims to capture children’s interpretation of holistic well-being within Irish primary
schools and add to the development of a comprehensive systems-informed positive education model.
Design/methodology/approach –This study utilized visual participatory research methods, including
PhotoVoice and one-on-one interviews, to assess children’s (n516) well-being, guided by Von Unger ’s
comprehensive seven-step framework. Data analysis was anchored within grounded theory, beginning with data
collection, initial coding, focused coding and culminating in identifying themes and subthemes. Data were
interpreted using the mosaic approach by integrating visual and verbal data.
Findings –This analysis uncovered three primary themes that affect student well-being: relationships, space and
physical environment and learning and curriculum, each with detailed subthemes. For instance, student–teacher
relationships, peer relationships, safety, learning spaces, the creative curriculum including arts and music and the
experiential richness of outdoor learning are crucial to students’ educational growth and well-being. These
aspects are seen as interconnected, shaping a holistic educational experience beyond academic learning to
encompass students’ comprehensive well-being. The students’ narratives demonstrated that learning is not
merely an academic exercise but a vital component of their well-being.
Originality/value –This study significantly departs from traditional educational research by advocating for
a dynamic, action-oriented understanding of “well-being.” It challenges the static, possessive interpretations
of well-being and introduces the concept of well-being as a fluid and ever-evolving process. This
reconceptualization positions well-being as a complex construct, influenced by an intricate web of
relationships, spanning human and non-human interactions, organizational and environmental structures,
personal desires, behavioral practices and broader societal and cultural frameworks.
Keywords Well-being, School, Students, Student voice, Participatory
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Well-being in schools encompasses cultivating positive relationships among students,
teachers, and the wider school community while fostering a supportive environment that
Health Education
241
© David Cashman, Wesley O’Brien and Fiona Chambers. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may
reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-
commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of
this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
This study was funded by the University College Cork, College of Arts, Celtic Civilisation and Social
Studies (CACSSS) Employment-Based PhD Scholarship.
Conflicts of interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Source of funding: This study was funded by the University College Cork College of Arts, Celtic
Civilisation and Social Studies (CACSSS) Employment-Based PhD Scholarship
Authors’ contribution statement: All authors had access to the data and contributed significantly to
writing the manuscript.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0965-4283.htm
Received 7 May 2024
Revised 13 September 2024
Accepted 7 January 2025
Health Education
Vol.125 No. 3, 2025
pp. 241-262
Emerald Publishing Limited
e-ISSN: 1758-714X
p-ISSN: 0965-4283
DOI 10.1108/HE-05-2024-0062
promotes social, emotional, and academic development (Department of Education and Skills,
2019). It involves creating a culture where everyone feels secure, connected, and valued and
where there are ample opportunities for learning, personal growth, and handling challenges
constructively (CASEL, 2015;Department of Education and Skills, 2019;National Scientific
Council on the Developing Child, 2015). It includes students’ perceptions (positive and
negative) towards school, people in school, and the school environment (Hascher, 2003).
Furthermore, Farrell et al. (2024) identified three well-being conceptualizations: being happy,
staying safe and healthy, and something you “do.”
Students’ well-being has been associated with positive mental health (Hill et al., 2020),
social relationships (Graham et al., 2016;Holfve-Sabel, 2014;Suldo et al., 2019;Navarro
et al., 2015), learning (Holfve-Sabel, 2014), and academic achievement (B€
ucker et al., 2018).
In addition, du Toit et al. (2022) identified authenticity, self-esteem, self-support for
autonomy, emotional repair, and the ability to regulate distress and despondency as outcomes
of positive student well-being. Over the past twenty years, positive education (PosEd) has
evolved, incorporating positive psychology as conceptualized by Seligman’s PERMA model
(Positive emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Accomplishment) with
educational methods to foster student well-being (Slemp, 2016;White and Kern, 2018).
Kern and Taylor (2021) expanded this through Systems Informed Positive Education (SIPE),
weaving in systems science to enhance individual and educational system health. Similarly,
Waters and Loton (2019) developed The SEARCH meta-framework within PosEd, providing
an overarching structure for its application and study.
Earlier research on students’ well-being predominantly focused on adolescents/older teens
(Ramadan, 2021;Schmidt and Hansson, 2018;Howell, 2009;du Toit et al., 2022). However,
in the past decade, there has been a growing interest in the well-being of primary school
students (Holfve-Sabel, 2014;Graham et al., 2016;Liu et al., 2014;Graetz et al., 2012;Chiva-
Bartoll et al., 2020;Lee et al., 2010). While various methodologies have been developed to
assess older students’ well-being, such as the student well-being questionnaire, anxiety
questionnaire, and the seven-domain (Having, Being, Relating, Feeling, Thinking,
Functioning, and Striving) student well-being model (Soutter et al., 2013;Hascher, 2007),
the well-being assessment of primary school students have relied heavily on alternative tools
such as subjective well-being in school scale (Liu et al., 2014), and the student’s social well-
being at school questionnaire (Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2020).
Engaging students in understanding their well-being can be effectively achieved through
participatory methods such as photo-elicitation interviews, talk and draw discussions, sorting
activities, and PhotoVoice. These methods extend beyond younger age groups and offer an
authentic way to involve all students in discussions about their lives, catering to their
developmental need for autonomy and self-expression (Honkanen et al., 2017;Kellock, 2020).
Traditional methods like questionnaires, while commonly used, often fall short in eliciting candid
responses from students. The structured format of questionnaires may lead to a lack of truthful
reporting due to social desirability bias or the reluctance to engage in self-disclosure (Abma and
Schrijver, 2019;Coyne et al., 2021). Participatory approaches, by contrast, create a dynamic
space for students to articulate their experiences more freely and creatively, providing a richer,
more honest insight into their well-being (Leavy and Hourigan, 2017;Montreuil et al., 2021).
This study utilized visual participatory research methods to capture interpretations of
holistic well-being within Irish primary schools. Specifically, the current research aimed to
explore (1) the authentic views of students on how they experience well-being in school and
(2) how their voices impact the development of a systems-informed PosEd model.
Methodology
Theoretical foundations of pupil well-being
This study is grounded in the principles of Positive Education, a pedagogical approach rooted
in Positive Psychology that seeks to integrate academic learning with the promotion of well-
HE
125,3
242
being. At the heart of Positive Education is the belief that schools should not only equip
students with intellectual skills but also provide opportunities to develop their emotional,
social, and psychological skills necessary for a flourishing life (Seligman, 2011;
Norrish, 2015).
The philosophical discourse surrounding Well-being, dating back to Aristotle’s exploration
of hedonism (Kahneman et al., 1999) and eudaimonia (Waterman, 1993), underscores the
dualism inherent in well-being discussions: the pursuit of pleasure versus a flourishing life.
Indeed, Jenkins et al. (2022, p. 2) also found that “experiencing and integrating both types of
well-being contribute to what psychologists have termed ‘flourishing.’” This fundamental
debate informs the educational approach to well-being, influencing the overall purpose of
well-being initiatives within schools. Moreover, the identification of several philosophical
approaches to Well-being in education highlights the varied lenses through which Well-being
can be conceptualized and integrated into educational settings (Diener, 1984;Ryff, 1989;
Seligman, 2002,2011;Ryan and Deci, 2000;Keyes, 2002;Diener et al., 2010;Roffey, 2012;
Huppert and So, 2013;Street, 2018;Waters and Loton, 2019;Peill, 2022).
In the wider field of well-being in education, there are several frameworks that consider
well-being from multiple perspectives (Konu and Rimpel€
a, 2002;Scottish Government, 2004;
Seligman et al., 2009;Brunwasser et al., 2009;Norrish, 2015;Stokes et al., 2019;Brackett
et al., 2012;Street, 2018;CASEL, 2017;Waters and Loton, 2019;Peill, 2022). Among them,
Seligman’s PERMA framework (2011, 2018), which includes positive emotion, engagement,
relationships, meaning, and accomplishment, is well established. This model has been adopted
by two leading schools, St Peter’s College, Adelaide (White and Murray, 2015) and Geelong
Grammar School (Norrish et al., 2013), with the latter adding a sixth element to the
framework: positive health. Kern et al. (2015) conducted a study in St Peter’s College with
over 500 male students to examine the efficacy of the PERMA framework. The authors found
that each component of the PERMA framework is linked to different well-being outcomes.
Positive emotion and relationships, for instance, were associated with life satisfaction, hope,
and gratitude. However, positive emotion alone was connected to physical vitality, and
relationships alone were linked to spirituality. This study led the researchers to conclude that
evaluating subjective well-being through multiple lenses allows schools to understand and
foster well-being in a more systematic and effective way.
This study, utilising the PhotoVoice methodology, seeks to explore how students’
experiences within an educational setting align with the principles of Positive Education,
particularly how they perceive and contribute to their own well-being. By using positive
education as a guiding theoretical lens, this study aims to identify the multiple dimensions of
well-being that emerge from students’ lived experiences. In doing so, it contributes to the
growing body of research advocating for a more holistic approach to student well-being in
schools, one that fully integrates academic achievement with personal growth and well-being.
Study setting and participants. Sixteen students aged 8–10 years old (six males and ten
females) were recruited from second and third classes in an urban, co-educational developing
primary school using a combination of convenience and purposive sampling. The purposive
sampling criteria were carefully considered to ensure a diverse representation of students in
terms of gender, social background, and learning abilities. This approach allowed the study to
capture a broad and representative range of perspectives on well-being, while remaining
feasible given the researcher’s proximity to the school.
The research methods and language were specifically tailored to be age-appropriate, taking
into account the students’ cognitive, linguistic, emotional, and social skills. The study was
conducted within a familiar school environment to help maintain participant comfort and ease.
A 4-week time frame was selected to allow students sufficient time to engage with the research
process and gradually deepen their understanding of well-being.
In line with the participatory nature of the PhotoVoice methodology, participants played an
active role in the coding and meaning-making process through their involvement in the gallery
walk. By sharing their images and narratives, they contributed to the co-construction of
Health Education
243
themes, effectively positioning them as co-researchers. A team-based approach to coding was
also employed, with the involvement of the teacher and Special Needs Assistant (SNA) in each
class. These individuals provided invaluable support throughout the research process, given
their established trust-based relationships with the students, and their daily classroom
interactions with the students.
Study design. The study setting, a primary school environment, was supplemented with
diverse visual resources and methods such as talk and draw, photo-elicitation, and dialogic
interactions, ensuring a rich and varied data collection process for four weeks to allow the
capture of genuine and unaltered children’s expressions.
The methodological design adheres to the Lundy model of child participation (Lundy,
2013), underscoring the importance of children’s perspectives as articulated by the
1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The methodological
framework is geared towards accessing and reflecting children’s well-being experiences in
primary schools through ethical participation (Harmon, 2020). Recognising the complexity
of children’s viewpoints, PhotoVoice empowers children as cultural researchers, revealing
themes adults may overlook (Gallacher and Gallagher, 2008;Komulainen, 2016;Luttrell,
2010;Burke, 2005). The research tackles child-adult power dynamics, guiding children’s
contributions in data analysis and interpretation (Luttrell, 2010;Wang and Hannes, 2020).
We applied the seven-step PhotoVoice framework according to Von Unger (2012) to
facilitate participant-centric, empowering research, yielding insightful data, as detailed in
Table 1.
Table 1. The implementation of PhotoVoice using Von Unger’s comprehensive seven-step framework
von Unger’s 7-step framework Research sessions
•Establishing a Thematic Focus: Identifying key themes and
issues pertinent to the participants’ experiences within their
educational settings
Session 1
•Informing and consenting using
picture books
Session 2
•Stock Photos to acquaint the children
with the research topic
•Engagement in Talkand Draw Sessions: Encouraging children
to accompany their photography with reflective journaling,
further elucidating their perspectives
Session 3
•Talk and draw sessions
•Fundamentals of Photography: Educating participants, in this
case, children, about basic photography skills to adequately
capture their environment
Session 4
•Basic photography instruction and
photo-taking
Session 5
•Gallery Walk
•Ranking Activity
•Conducting Group Dialogs: Facilitating discussions centered
around the photographs taken, fostering a deeper
understanding of the children’s views and experiences
Session 6
•Child-led interviews
•Thematic Analysis of Photos and Discussions: Analyzing the
collected photographs and dialogs to identify prevalent themes
and insights
Data Analysis
•Initial Coding
•Focused Coding
•Mosaic Approach
•Formulating Actionable Recommendations: Develop practical
and insightful recommendations based on the analysis to
address identified issues or enhance the studied environment
Results and Findings
•Reflective Evaluation of the Process: Assessing the
effectiveness of the methodology and the research process to
promote learning and development
Future Directions
Source(s): Table created by authors
HE
125,3
244
Our research methods closely mirrored the research previously conducted by Martin and
Buckley (2018), which sought to include the voices of young children in an ongoing evaluation
of a community-based prevention and early intervention program. The data collection process
spanned four weeks and unfolded exclusively within the primary school setting.
Session 1: introducing the researcher. During this inaugural session, we sought informed
consent from the participating children. Children could only provide their consent if they fully
understood their role in the study and the purpose of the study.To inform the children about the
study, the researcher created a picture book detailing the research project, introducing the
researcher and explaining the study’s purpose in a visually engaging and child-friendly manner
(Figure 1). The European Commission Guide to Creating Child-Friendly Versions of Written
Documents (European Union, 2012) was used to develop the picture book. This approach
follows the “narrative non-fiction” method, which has been recognized as an ethical way to
provide information, where the researcher establishes the research context and purpose,
outlines the rules of participation, and presents information in the form of a factual narrative,
supported by real photographs of people, places, and events (Mayne et al., 2015).
Session 2: introduction to well-being. This session commenced with introducing the
concept of well-being in school to the children using photo elicitation, followed by a review of
the previous session’s narrative. This involved presenting stock photos illustrating caregiver
interactions and photographs of the primary school taken by the school’s staff (Figure 2). This
session’s primary objective was to further acquaint the children with our research team and
cultivate a sense of comfort with our presence within the primary school environment.
Session 3: talk and draw. A talk and draw session was conducted with the children,
implementing the well-established talk and draw method (Hanley et al., 2004). The
advantages of such activities include child-friendliness, bypassing the limitations of language,
and engagement in an activity (drawing) with which children are familiar (Angell et al., 2014;
Horstman et al., 2008). This aimed to elicit the children’s nuanced perspectives on their
everyday experiences while acclimating them to our presence in the primary school. Notably,
posters were used as effective prompts for the children, and markers were provided, consistent
with their prior use in the primary school classroom, to evoke enthusiasm. The session
Figure 1. Picture book describing research study
Health Education
245
comprised three groups, each consisting of 4–5 children, accompanied by their teacher. Each
group was allocated a 20-min time slot for participation. After completing their coloring and
drawing activities, the children were encouraged to affix their drawings onto their preferred
photos displayed on the wall, originating from the prior photo-elicitation session (Figure 3).
Session 4: learning how to use cameras. The children were entrusted with digital cameras
and received basic instructions on their operation. Their task entailed capturing photographs
over two days of anything that made them feel well within the confines of their primary school.
The primary school staff provided support in addressing any technical challenges that arose
during the execution of this activity.
Session 5: gallery walk. This session involved a “gallery walk” with printed copies of the
photographs captured by the children (Figure 4), serving as the primary source of empirical
data for our research study (De Jaegher and Di Paolo, 2007).
The children were then invited to rank their five most preferred photographs. This approach
enabled children to select and prioritize their preferred images and facilitated the inclusion of
non-verbal children in the discourse. As a thinking skill tool (Rockett and Percival, 2002), the
ranking could be organized vertically, horizontally, or in a mix of both (Figure 5).
Figure 2. Stack photographs
Figure 3. Talk and draw drawings
HE
125,3
246
Figure 4. Gallery walk
Figure 5. Ranking activity
Health Education
247
Session 6: one-on-one interviews. Interviews were conducted with the participants
individually in the school’s resource room to comprehensively understand the children’s daily
experiences within the school and home environments. Subsequently, group discussions were
conducted, as guided by child-friendly questions adapted from Wang and Burris (1994). Our
questions were reframed as “Why did you take that photo?,” “What is happening in the photo?”
“What are you doing in the photo?” and “Did you like having the camera?” This facilitated the
articulation of participants’ interpretations of the visuals and encouraged peer-based
discussion. These interviews were recorded and subsequently transcribed. Session durations
ranged from 7 to 15 min, tailored to each child’s level of engagement. Variability was noted in
both the communicativeness and the focus on individual photographs contributed by the
students.
Data analysis. Data analysis was anchored in grounded theory, beginning in tandem with
data collection, as recommended by Thornberg and Charmaz (2014),Corbin and Strauss
(1990), and Corbin and Strauss (2008). This method guaranteed a direct and deep engagement
with the data from the start, which was essential for grasping the subtle details in classroom
environments. In the initial coding phase of the study, the analysis began with the artifacts from
the talk and draw sessions, followed by an examination of the photographs. This process
entailed assigning descriptive labels to data segments to encapsulate and classify the
information, as suggested by Charmaz (2006). Additionally, frequency tables were created to
track how often certain objects or people appeared in the drawings and photographs (Table 2).
A subsequent comparative analysis, as described by Glaser and Strauss (2017), was
conducted, resulting in nine common codes. Focused coding was employed to elevate
significant codes into thematic categories, as described by Charmaz (2015). This iterative
process involved interrogating the interview data across all nine classes and refining categories
through methodological triangulation (Heale and Forbes, 2013) across different data forms,
such as transcripts and visual data. This phase was pivotal for conceptualizing the data from
varied analytical perspectives.
By analyzing data from talk and draw sessions, photographs, gallery walks, ranking
activities, and child interviews, we employed the Mosaic approach (Clark, 2005) as the final
data analysis stage. This integrated approach combines the visual with the verbal (Clark and
Moss, 2011). The idea behind the Mosaic approach is that researchers collect data through
various means. These are what Clark and Moss (2011) consider “individual tiles.” The
researcher then combines these pieces to form one big picture, like many little tiles forming
one big mosaic. Our mosaic tiles are included in Figure 6.
Table 2. Frequency of objects/people drawn during the talk and draw sessions and the objects/people
photographed during photograph sessions
Variables
Number of occurrences
during sessions
Talk and
draw Photograph
Friends 21 29
School staff 12 28
School physical environment, including the sensory room, nurture room, yard,
and garden
16 28
Literacy and numeracy activities, including books, library, and work samples 13 13
Outdoor learning areas 11 8
Physical education 10 –
Artwork samples or utensils 7 8
After school program 7 –
Music (piano, drums, ukuleles) 0 4
Source(s): Table created by authors
HE
125,3
248
Research ethics. This study was approved by University College Cork’s Social
Research Ethics Committee (Log, 2021–090) in September 2021, aligning with the 2011
Department of Children and Youth Affairs ethical research guidelines involving children.
Utmost care was taken to protect the children and their families’ privacy, anonymity, and
confidentiality.
Explicit consent was mandatory for all images taken, and any photographs captured
without consent were immediately deleted. Identifying images have been excluded from this
publication unless specific permission was granted. We rigorously followed the copyright and
ownership guidance issued by the university’s Office for Corporate and Legal Affairs for
photographs taken by children.
Results
Three primary conceptual themes were identified, each with three subthemes highlighting the
distinct facets of a child’s communicative methods and school experiences contributing to
their well-being.
Theme 1: relationships
Student-teacher relationships. The role of student-teacher/SNA relationships in shaping the
educational experience within the primary school setting was a prominent sub-theme that
emerged in our study. A detailed analysis of the various forms of data, including the
photographs taken by students and their drawings, provided a multifaceted perspective on
these relationships.
Our analysis of the visual data revealed a substantial number of photographs taken by
pupils that featured school staff, indicating the prominence of school staff in the students’
school experiences (Table 2). Every child also created a drawing of their teachers during the
talk and draw sessions, which further emphasized the importance of these relationships. These
Figure 6. Sample of mosaic tiles for the theme of relationships
Health Education
249
interactions contribute significantly to a positive and conducive learning environment,
strongly indicative of the teachers’ roles as mentors and guides.
Integrating children’s artwork and photographs in our analysis allowed for a
comprehensive and participatory exploration of the children’s experiences and perceptions.
This collectively illustrated a pervasive theme of the essential role that school staff play in
fostering a secure and supportive learning environment. The convergence of visual and verbal
data through the Mosaic approach revealed a clear narrative: the teacher’s role in the primary
school context is profoundly influential, extending beyond educational instruction to
encompassing emotional support and providing a secure learning atmosphere.
Peer relationships. In assessing the role of peer relationships within the primary school
setting, our study explored the dynamics of child-to-child interactions, yielding
significant findings that underscore their importance in pupils’ educational and social
development. Children engaged extensively in socialization and collaborative activities
with their peers. This consistent interaction was instrumental in fostering a sense of
community belonging and was essential for developing critical social skills. The
influence of peer relationships extended beyond socialization, significantly impacting the
children’s learning experiences. Collaborative and peer-assisted learning activities were
common, reinforcing the notion that peers play a crucial role in sharing knowledge and
developing new skills.
The data from the talk and draw sessions and photograph analyses revealed a
unanimous sentiment among the children: friendships at school contributed positively to
their well-being. This was a pervasive theme across all visual and verbal expressions
collected during the study. The children explicitly conveyed the emotional significance of
these peer relationships. Student P remarked, “Friends make me feel happy and help me
when I am sad,” highlighting the supportive nature of peer relationships. Student J plainly
stated, “My friends make me feel happiness,” capturing the joy peers bring to her school
experience.
The unanimity of children’s reflections on peer relationships, evident in their drawings and
photographs, clearly indicates the collective value placed on friendships for their overall well-
being in school. This consensus underscores the critical role that peer connections play in
creating a nurturing and emotionally supportive school environment.
Safety. The significance of safety within the school setting emerged as a prominent theme
from our research, particularly through student interviews. Agbenyega (2011) defines safety
within children’s learning environments as spaces where they feel secure and are free to
explore without excessive adult interference. This concept of safety extends beyond physical
security to include psychological comfort, fostering autonomy, trust, and engagement in
learning activities. The study emphasizes that such environments are crucial for cognitive and
emotional development, supporting the notion that effective educational practices must
prioritize creating and managing these safe spaces to enhance children’s learning experiences
(Agbenyega, 2011). In our study, the prominence of student’s relationships with teachers and
SNAs was first noted in their drawings and photographs, illustrating a collective appreciation
for the role of the school staff. These expressions by the pupils underscored the value they
placed on staff in enhancing their well-being at school.
It was, however, the child-led interviews that brought this theme to the forefront. In these
discussions, students articulated a sense of security fostered by school staff. For instance,
Student B stated, “Staff make me feel safe in school and help me learn as well,” encapsulating
the dual role of school staff as both protectors and educators. Student D further complemented
this sentiment with his remark, “Teachers make me feel safe in school,” pointing to the critical
need for a protective environment that shields students from physical and emotional harm.
These first-hand accounts by students highlight the essential role that school staff play in
creating a nurturing and emotionally supportive learning environment. As expressed by the
students, safety is not merely a background condition but a fundamental aspect of their daily
educational experience.
HE
125,3
250
Theme 2: space and physical environment
Sensory space and nurture room. Our research corroborates the findings of recent studies by
Wang et al. (2020) and Kaya and Erdem (2021), supporting the critical role of the school
environment in promoting student well-being. In our study, 23.7% of photographs captured
featured school spaces, emphasizing their significance in the student’s everyday experience.
The school where our research took place was equipped with nurture [1] and sensory [2]
rooms, each serving a distinct purpose. However, on closer examination, many photos
included classroom displays, art displays, samples of children’s work on the walls, and many
classroom items. This suggests that the school environment is a backdrop and an active
participant in the educational process. These elements contribute to a sense of community and
personal identity among students and are essential components of well-being. Classroom
displays and student work on the walls reflect a learning culture that values student
contributions, enhancing their sense of achievement and belonging. This visual and physical
engagement with the school environment reinforces the pedagogical relationship and mirrors
the “situatedness” of learning (Fenwick, 2014) and “place-belongingness” (Antonsich, 2010).
Furthermore, it highlights vital yet generally overlooked relationships between the learning
environment, student learning, and well-being. This reveals the potential of participatory,
values-based design approaches to create learning spaces that respond to contemporary
learners’ needs (Hughes et al., 2019).
Interviews with the students themselves provide a clear narrative of these findings. Student
F articulated a positive relationship with the school’s sensory spaces, stating, “Sensory room
help me calm down,” illustrating the importance of such rooms for students needing to manage
sensory input and find emotional balance. In addition, Student J expressed affection for
another key area designed for emotional support, saying, “I love going to the nurture room. I
love the freedom there and that you can bring some snugglies (soft toys) so you have a calm
space to do your work.” This personal testimony highlights the nurture room as a place of
comfort and autonomy, vital for students who benefit from a calm environment to support their
learning and emotional needs.
The convergence of visual data from our photographic evidence and the authentic voices of
students like Student F and Student J strengthens the argument for deliberately creating special
spaces within schools while highlighting the necessity for schools to consider all areas as
potential well-being spaces. It becomes evident that while nurture and sensory rooms serve
their specialized purposes, the ethos of well-being should permeate every corner of the school
environment. Hallways, libraries, classrooms, and even outdoor areas should be designed with
the same intentionality to support emotional and educational needs. This holistic approach
acknowledges that every space where a student interacts has the potential to impact their well-
being, thereby contributing significantly to holistic student development.
Outdoor learning. Outdoor learning was a significant component of our school research
site, especially for the younger students in the junior and senior infant classes who participate
in a structured outdoor learning program. Our study is consistent with a growing body of
evidence suggesting that spending more time outdoors in nature benefits young people’s well-
being (McCormick, 2017). Outdoor environments offer numerous benefits for children’s
learning, health, and development. These include supporting emotional regulation and
enhancing overall well-being (Louv, 2005). A longitudinal study of over 40,000 pupils found
that outdoor lessons significantly enhanced students’ enjoyment and well-being, with 95%
reporting more enjoyment and 90% feeling healthier and happier (Waite et al., 2013). Our
research showed that students associate outdoor learning with enhanced well-being and
calmness. This positive effect of outdoor learning activities was a dominant theme throughout
the study’s talk and draw activities, photographs, and interviews. The children emphasized the
soothing and regulatory impact of the outdoor environment on their emotions and how happy
outdoor learning made them feel.
Student C’s observation, “The garden and the plants make me feel happy,” showcases the
joy of direct contact with nature. This individual reflection is part of a broader enthusiasm for
Health Education
251
experiential learning outside the classroom. Student L’s enthusiastic comment, “The outdoors
is my favorite thing in school because I love forest school,” echoes this sentiment. Adding to
these perspectives, Student H noted, “Outdoor learning makes me feel free; the birds singing
make me feel calm,” capturing the essence of the peace and autonomy students feel when
learning amidst nature’s sounds and sights. These insights collectively affirm the profound
impact that outdoor learning has on students’ happiness and self-regulation during their
educational journey.
Theme 3: learning and curriculum
Academic curriculum. This research uncovers a nuanced student perspective in challenging
the conventional adult conceptualizations of well-being in educational settings, which Farrell
et al. (2024) describe as predominantly associated with feelings of happiness and well-being as
something you “do.” According to the children’s experiences, well-being is deeply embedded
in the learning process. This paradigm shift suggests that students perceive their well-being not
as a separate by-product of education but as a core experience that unfolds through their
academic endeavors.
This reframing is evident in how the students engage with the curriculum. There is an
enthusiasm for activities that require mental agility and practical engagement. This can be seen
in photos of mental math exercises and hands-on scientific experiments. These activities,
which necessitate a tactile and investigative approach to learning, resonate strongly with the
students. The eagerness and commitment displayed by the children in these learning scenarios
suggest that well-being is closely tied to the satisfaction and sense of accomplishment derived
from mastering new concepts and skills. Visual evidence from the students, comprising circle
time sessions and outdoor educational activities, illustrates the curriculum’s practical
application. These student-generated images display an array of learning techniques, from
conventional literacy and numeracy aids to innovative visual frameworks for writing, which
they navigate in stages.
Personal quotes from the students further underscore this sentiment. The repeated phrase
from student A, “Learning makes me feel good,” conveys a sense of enjoyment in their
educational journey. Furthermore, student F’s statement, “learning helps me and helps me
learn things,” signifies the perceived personal growth associated with their learning. These
expressions, directly from the students, reflect their academic engagement and a broader
satisfaction with their educational environment.
The arts and music. Our study also underscores the arts and music as integral elements of
the curriculum, as evidenced by their frequent mention in the talk-and-draw sessions and the
photography analysis (Table 2). These disciplines were instrumental in fostering the children’s
creative expression, providing avenues for personal articulation, and encouraging exploration
within artistic realms. The engagement with arts and music was related to increased emotional
investment and excitement, thus enhancing the students’ comprehensive educational
experience. Student A’s reflection on a picture of the piano, utilized daily by their teacher,
encapsulates this sentiment, expressing a fondness for the instrument’s sound and the overall
experience of listening to music. Student A states, “This is a picture of the piano, and
sometimes (teacher’s name) plays the piano when we have choir, and I like the sound of
music.” Similarly, Student K’s perception of art as a “calming activity” exemplifies the dual
role of art and music as conduits for self-expression and exploration and as regulatory practices
that provide solace and stability for the students. These insights affirm the multifaceted
contribution of the arts to the student’s well-being and educational enrichment, which is
consistent with Nohilly et al. (2023), who argue that arts education, which includes disciplines
like music and visual arts, has gained recognition for its potential to bolster student well-being,
Physical education. The essential role of physical education in educational programs was
evident through our investigation, especially in the talk and draw sessions and interviews. A
systematic review by Andermo et al. (2020) indicates that school-related interventions that
HE
125,3
252
promote physical activity can reduce anxiety, increase resilience, increase well-being, and
improve the positive mental health of children and young people. Furthermore, there is a
worldwide call to action for enhancing children’s physical activity (Kraus et al., 2015;Woods
et al., 2010;World Health Organization, 2016). Although physical education and physical
activity are distinct concepts with different influences, the role of physical education in schools
is critical for fostering a commitment to lifelong physical activity. Specifically, school-based
physical education is recognized as a fundamental and structured component of academic life,
where children’s physical training and growth occur (Fahey et al., 2005).
Our research identified physical education classes as critical environments for fostering
social development and positive emotions. Student L’s direct quote, “I like to be outside so I
can run and do athletics,” exemplifies the children’s affinity for the physicality and freedom
offered by such activities. This sentiment is supported by the recurring appearance of games,
yard play, and physical education sessions (Table 2) in the talk and draw activities,
emphasizing their regular integration into the school’s routine. In the talk and draw sessions,
children included annotated pictures of Rinka [3], yoga, athletics, and yard games,
emphasizing the importance of looking at data from multiple perspectives.
Discussion
Insights from learning and developmental sciences to guide educational practices emphasize
nurturing environments that support cognitive, social, and emotional development (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2019;Osher et al., 2018;Cantor et al., 2018). Furthermore, these studies
advocate for personalized and active learning strategies, highlighting the importance of
adaptive teaching methods and the pivotal role of teacher-student relationships in fostering an
inclusive and supportive educational atmosphere. Our study’s comprehensive exploration of
primary education echoes Darling-Hammond et al. (2019) by presenting a multi-dimensional
perspective approach to investigating student well-being, and the research is underpinned by
the profound interplay between student-teacher and peer relationships, space and
environmental considerations, alongside curricular structures. These components coalesce
to form the backbone of children’s educational experience, each influencing and enhancing the
other synergistically. Echoing the assertions of (Burke and Giraldez-Hayes, 2022), we found
that these relational dynamics are foundational for well-being, constituting a vital aspect of
PosEd, focusing on and reinforcing individuals’ physical and mental health within educational
settings. This was vividly demonstrated in the photographs and drawings depicting the
positive engagement between pupils and educational facilitators—including teachers, special
needs assistants, and principals (Taylor, 2009).
The photographs depict the school’s environment, illustrating interactions indicative of a
culture of support and empathy among individuals, suggesting a pronounced degree of
relatedness within the school community. This is crucial for psychological functioning (Ryan
and Deci, 2006). Moreover, this sense of relatedness is bidirectional, as Klassen et al. (2012)
suggest that teachers’ well-being is tied to their relationships with students. Thus, the nurturing
interactions evident in our findings enhance the student’s educational experience and
contribute to the educators’ job satisfaction and emotional health. Supporting these relational
dynamics, Powell et al. (2020) argued for the importance of such connections in fostering the
well-being of both students and educators. Our findings align with this view, suggesting that
educational frameworks should strongly emphasize relational care and interpersonal
connectivity.
This study also sheds light on the critical role of the school environment in supporting
student well-being (Pillay et al., 2005). As highlighted by the children’s narratives and visual
data, sensory spaces and nurture rooms provided essential emotional and sensory regulation
opportunities. This aligns with sensory integration theory (Ayres, 2016), which advocates for
environments that cater to the sensory needs of children. The concept of “safe space”
transcends mere physicality, reflecting a more profound need for spaces that offer emotional
Health Education
253
security and comfort, resonating with the principles of environmental psychology and how the
physical environment impacts child development (Nair and Minhas, 2022).
Our findings underscore the significance of a well-rounded curriculum beyond traditional
academic subjects. Including the arts, music, and physical education in the curriculum fosters
creative expression and emotional investment in students. Such curricular elements contribute
to cognitive development and offer therapeutic benefits, supporting the notion that education
should cater to multiple intelligences (Gardner, 2015) and provide diverse pathways for
student engagement. Physical education stands out as a crucial component for enhancing
physical health and social skills, reinforcing the importance of peer relationships and
supportive environments. This is important in the context of research by Carlin et al. (2024),
which states that in the 2022 Ireland North and South Report Card on Physical Activity, fewer
than 20% of children and adolescents with disabilities are meeting the current PA
recommendations, with less than half of children and adolescents achieving the guideline of
<2 h of screen time per day.
The interconnection of these themes is further exemplified in the structured outdoor
learning program, which fosters a bond with nature and supports hands-on, experiential
learning. The enthusiasm for outdoor activities expressed by the pupils underscores the value
placed on interacting with the natural environment, aligning with outdoor education
philosophies (Waite et al., 2013;Morgan and Waite, 2017). Therefore, the current study
significantly departs from traditional educational research by advocating for a dynamic,
action-oriented understanding of “well-being.” It challenges the static, possessive
interpretations previously held and introduces a conception of well-being as a fluid and
ever-evolving process. This reconceptualization positions well-being as a complex construct
influenced by an intricate web of relationships spanning human and non-human interactions,
organizational and environmental structures, personal desires, behavioral practices, and
broader societal and cultural frameworks.
Notably, the students’ narratives expressly demonstrated that learning is not merely an
academic exercise but a vital component of their well-being. The children articulated that their
learning experiences contribute significantly to their sense of well-being and that well-being
extends beyond the confines of the classroom and encompasses their entire school experience,
including their relationships with peers and teachers and their interactions with the school
environment. This critical insight emphasizes integrating the students’ voices while
developing educational practices and policies. The children’s reflections on how learning
activities make them “feel good” and the joy they express in learning provide compelling
evidence that educational well-being is multifaceted and deeply rooted in their learning
experiences. This contrasts with adult conceptualizations of well-being by Farrell et al. (2024),
who emphasized how neoliberal interpretations of well-being as an object, a tradable
commodity based on notions of individuality, have infiltrated the education system, affecting
even the youngest learners.
Limitations of this study
This study focuses on just one school, which limits the generalizability and applicability of the
findings to other schools with different resources, cultural backgrounds, and educational
practices. The context-specific nature of the results necessitates careful consideration when
attempting to extend these findings to different settings, which may require adaptations to fit
other school environments.
Additionally, the research engaged only a small group of students (n516), which may not
adequately capture the full range of student experiences and perceptions of the school’s student
population, which is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of student well-being. The
convenience and purposive sampling methods may introduce potential biases as they rely on
the availability and willingness of participants, which might not yield a balanced
representation of the broader student body. Such sampling can skew the data, reflecting
HE
125,3
254
more about those who chose to participate rather than the entire student population.
Furthermore, the research methods employed, including visual participatory techniques,
might have been influenced by the presence of the researchers. This interaction could affect
how participants respond, potentially leading them to highlight certain aspects of their
experience over others due to the researcher’s influence.
Thus, future research should recruit a larger population from multiple schools with varied
demographic characteristics to enhance the reliability of the findings and allow for a better
assessment of the variability in student experiences. Employing randomized sampling
methods would help mitigate selection bias and provide a more accurate reflection of student
experiences across different educational settings.
Conclusions
Aligned with the evolving visual participatory research that positions children as active
participants and co-researchers in their own lives (Bruner, 2004;James, 2008), this research
contributes to a deeper understanding of generational orders and children’s unique
perspectives on social realities (Honkanen et al., 2017;Kellock, 2020;Abma and Schrijver,
2019;Coyne et al., 2021;Leavy and Hourigan, 2017). In synthesizing these findings, it
becomes apparent that the educational experience is an interconnected system where
relationships, the environment, and the curriculum play interdependent roles. Each aspect is
vital to the well-being and development of the pupils and the professional fulfillment of the
educators.
In addition, the findings from this study contribute to an enriched understanding of well-
being in educational settings, emphasizing the necessity for a systems-informed model of
PosEd that is responsive to the voices of its primary stakeholders—the children. Educators and
policymakers can develop more holistic educational practices by incorporating the children’s
insights into how learning shapes their well-being. These practices will not only teach but will
also nurture the well-being of children, ensuring that the educational environment is one where
well-being is dynamically pursued and realized through a synergy of teaching, learning, and
participatory engagement.
Notes
1. “A nurture room sets out to provide a safe, welcoming and caring environment for learning and will
replicate the home environment with a comfortable seating area, a kitchen facility for preparing food
and a working area to address formal curriculum demands.” (Sloan et al., 2020)
2. Sensory rooms, are tailored spaces that caters to students’ sensory needs, helping them self-regulate
through individualized sensory experiences to enhance readiness for learning and social interaction. It
engages primary senses such as sight, hearing, touch, and smell, along with vestibular and
proprioceptive senses. This space may also be known as a sensory room, calm space, chill-out room,
multi-sensory room, or sensory garden (National Council for Special Education, 2021).
3. An integrated physical education programme, which incorporates athletics, gymnastics, dance, drama
and fundamental movement skills.
References
Abma, T.A. and Schrijver, J. (2019), “‘Are we famous or something?’ Participatory Health Research
with children using photovoice”, Educational Action Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 405-426, doi:
10.1080/09650792.2019.1627229.
Agbenyega, J.S. (2011), “Building new identities in teacher preparation for inclusive education in
Ghana”, Current Issues in Education, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-36.
Andermo, S., Hallgren, M., Nguyen, T.T.D., Jonsson, S., Petersen, S., Friberg, M., Romqvist, A.,
Stubbs, B. and Elinder, L.S. (2020), “School-related physical activity interventions and mental
Health Education
255
health among children: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Sports Med Open, Vol. 6 No. 1,
p. 25, doi: 10.1186/s40798-020-00254-x.
Angell, C., Alexander, J. and Hunt, J.A. (2014), “‘Draw, write and tell’: a literature review and
methodological development on the ‘draw and write’ research method”, Journal of Early
Childhood Research, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 17-28, doi: 10.1177/1476718x14538592.
Antonsich, M. (2010), “Searching for belonging – an analytical framework”, Geography Compass,
Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 644-659, doi: 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2009.00317.x.
Ayres, A.J. (2016), “Improving academic scoresthrough sensory integration”, Journal of Learning
Disabilities, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 338-343, doi: 10.1177/002221947200500605.
Brackett, M.A., Reyes, M.R., Rivers, S.E., Elbertson, N.A. and Salovey, P. (2012), “Assessing
teachers’ beliefs about social and emotional learning”, Journal of Psychoeducational
Assessment, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 219-236, doi: 10.1177/0734282911424879.
Bruner, J. (2004), “Life as narrative”, Social Research: An International Quarterly, Vol. 71 No. 3,
pp. 691-710, doi: 10.1353/sor.2004.0045.
Brunwasser, S.M., Gillham, J.E. and Kim, E.S. (2009), “A meta-analytic review of the Penn Resiliency
Program’s effect on depressive symptoms”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
Vol. 77 No. 6, pp. 1042-1054, doi: 10.1037/a0017671.
B€
ucker, S., Nuraydin, S., Simonsmeier, B.A., Schneider, M. and Luhmann, M. (2018), “Subjective
well-being and academic achievement: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Research in Personality,
Vol. 74, pp. 83-94, doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2018.02.007.
Burke, P. (2005), History and Social Theory, Cornell University Press, New York.
Burke, J. and Giraldez-Hayes, A. (2022), “Positive schools: an introduction”, in Giraldez-Hayes, A.
and Burke, J. (Eds), Applied Positive School Psychology, Routledge, eBook Version, pp. 23-28,
doi: 10.4324/9781003228158.
Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L. and Rose, T. (2018), “Malleability, plasticity, and
individuality: how children learn and develop in context1”, Applied Developmental Science,
Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 307-337, doi: 10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649.
Carlin, L., McPherson, G. and Davison, R. (2024), “The International Classification of Functioning
Disability and Health Framework (ICF): a new approach to enhance sport and physical activity
participation among people with disabilities in Scotland”, Front Sports Act Living, Vol. 6,
1225198, doi: 10.3389/fspor.2024.1225198.
CASEL (2015), CASEL Guide: Effective Social and Emotional Learning Programs: Middle and High,
2nd ed., CASEL, Chicago, IL.
CASEL (2017), Key insights from the Collaborating Districts Initiative, Chicago, IL: CASEL.
Charmaz, K. (2006), Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis,
Sage Publishers.
Charmaz, K. (2015), “Teaching theory construction with initial grounded theory tools: a reflection on
lessons and learning”, Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1610-1622, doi:
10.1177/1049732315613982.
Chiva-Bartoll, O., Moliner, M.L. and Salvador-Garc�
ıa, C. (2020), “Can service-learning promote social
well-being in primary education students? A mixed method approach”, Children and Youth
Services Review, Vol. 111, 104841, doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104841.
Clark, A. (2005), “Ways of seeing using the Mosaic approach to listen to young children’s
perspectives”, in Clark, A., Kjørholt, A.T. and Moss, P. (Eds), Beyond Listening, Bristol
University Press, pp. 29-50, doi: 10.2307/j.ctt1t89j0f.8.
Clark, A. and Moss, P. (2011), Listening to Young Children: The Mosaic Approach, Jessica Kingsley
Publishers.
Corbin, J.M. and Strauss, A. (1990), “Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative
criteria”, Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 3-21, doi: 10.1007/bf00988593.
Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2008), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
HE
125,3
256
Coyne, I., Mallon, D. and Chubb, E. (2021), “Research with young children: exploring the
methodological advantages and challenges of using hand puppets and draw and tell”, Children
and Society, Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 813-830, doi: 10.1111/chso.12452.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B. and Osher, D. (2019), “Implications for
educational practice of the science of learning and development”, Applied Developmental
Science, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 97-140, doi: 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.
De Jaegher, H. and Di Paolo, E. (2007), “Participatory sense-making”, Phenomenology and the
Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 485-507, doi: 10.1007/s11097-007-9076-9.
Department of Education and Skills (2019), Well-being Policy Statement and Framework for Practice,
The Stationery Office, Dublin.
Diener, E. (1984), “Subjective well-being”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 542-575, doi:
10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542.
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.W., Oishi, S. and Biswas-Diener, R. (2010),
“New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings”,
Social Indicators Research, Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 143-156, doi: 10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y.
du Toit, A., Thomson, R. and Page, A. (2022), “A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal
studies of the antecedents and consequences of well-being among university students”,
International Journal of Well-being, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 163-206, doi: 10.5502/ijw.v12i2.1897.
European Union (2012), “Creating child-friendly versions of written documents: a guide”, available at:
https://www.qub.ac.uk/research-centres/CentreforChildrensRights/CCRFilestore/Filetoupload,
1269252,en.pdf
Fahey, T., Delaney, L. and Gannon, B. (2005), School Children and Sport in Ireland, Economic and
Social Research Institute, Dublin.
Farrell, E., Symonds, J., Devine, D., Sloan, S., Crean, M., Cahoon, A. and Hogan, J. (2024), “What
does well-being mean to me? Conceptualisations of well-being in Irish primary schooling”,
Health Education, Vol. 124, doi: 10.1108/HE-03-2024-0023.
Fenwick, T. (2014), “Rethinking professional responsibility: matters of account”, in Fenwick, T. and
Nerland, M. (Eds), Reconceptualising Professional Learning: Sociomaterial Knowledges,
Practices, and Responsibilities, Routledge, London, pp. 157-170.
Gallacher, L.-A. and Gallagher, M. (2008), “Methodological immaturity in childhood research?
Thinking throughparticipatory methods”, Childhood, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 499-516, doi: 10.1177/
090756820809167.
Gardner, H. (2015), “The theory of multiple intelligences”, in Handbook of Educational Ideas and
Practices, Routledge, pp. 930-938.
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (2017), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Research, Routledge, New York, doi: 10.4324/9780203793206.
Graetz, B., Littlefield, L., Trinder, M., Dobia, B., Souter, M., Champion, C., Boucher, S., Killick-
Moran, C. and Cummins, R. (2012), “KidsMatter: a population health model to support student
mental health and well-being in primary schools”, International Journal of Mental Health
Promotion, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 13-20, doi: 10.1080/14623730.2008.9721772.
Graham, A., Powell, M.A. and Truscott, J. (2016), “Facilitating student well-being: relationships do
matter”, Educational Research, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 366-383, doi: 10.1080/
00131881.2016.1228841.
Hanley, R., Masterson, J., Spencer, L. and Evans, D. (2004), “How long do the advantages of learning
to read a transparent orthography last? An investigation of the reading skills and reading
impairment of Welsh children at 10 years of age”, Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology Section A, Vol. 57 No. 8, pp. 1393-1410, doi: 10.1080/02724980343000819.
Harmon, M. (2020), “‘I am a Catholic Buddhist’: the voice of children on religion and religious
education in an Irish Catholic primary school classroom”, available at: https://
doras.dcu.ie/22639/
Health Education
257
Hascher, T. (2003), “Well-being in school-Why students need social support”, in Mayring, P. and von
Rh€
oneck, C. (Eds), Learning Emotions-The Influence of Affective Factors on Classroom
Learning, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Lausanne, pp. 127-142.
Hascher, T. (2007), “Exploring students’ well-being by taking a variety of looks into the classroom”,
Hellenic Journal of Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 331-349.
Heale, R. and Forbes, D. (2013), “Understanding triangulation in research”, Evidence-Based Nursing,
Vol. 16 No. 4, p. 98, doi: 10.1136/eb-2013-101494.
Hill, M., Farrelly, N., Clarke, C. and Cannon, M. (2020), “Student mental health and well-being:
overview and future directions”, Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 1-8,
doi: 10.1017/ipm.2020.110.
Holfve-Sabel, M.-A. (2014), “Learning, interaction and relationships as components of student well-
being: differences between classes from student and teacher perspective”, Social Indicators
Research, Vol. 119 No. 3, pp. 1535-1555, doi: 10.1007/s11205-013-0557-7.
Honkanen, K., Poikolainen, J. and Karlsson, L. (2017), “Children and young people as co-researchers –
researching subjective well-being in residential area with visual and verbal methods”, Children’s
Geographies, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 184-195, doi: 10.1080/14733285.2017.1344769.
Horstman, M., Aldiss, S., Richardson, A. and Gibson, F. (2008), “Methodological issues when using
the draw and write technique with children aged 6 to 12 years”, Qualitative Health Research,
Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 1001-1011, doi: 10.1177/1049732308318230.
Howell, A.J. (2009), “Flourishing: achievement-related correlates of students’ well-being”, The
Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-13, doi: 10.1080/17439760802043459.
Hughes, K., Bellis, M.A., Sethi, D., Andrew, R., Yon, Y., Wood, S., Ford, K., Baban, A., Boderscova, L.,
Kachaeva, M., Makaruk, K., Markovic, M., Povilaitis, R., Raleva, M., Terzic, N., Veleminsky, M.,
Włodarczyk, J. and Zakhozha, V. (2019), “Adverse childhood experiences, childhood relationships
and associated substance use and mental health in young Europeans”, The European Journal of
Public Health, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 741-747, doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckz037.
Huppert, F.A. and So, T.T. (2013), “Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual
framework for defining well-being”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 110 No. 3, pp. 837-861,
doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7.
James, A. (2008), “Giving voice to children’s voices: practices and problems, pitfalls and potentials”,
American Anthropologist, Vol. 109 No. 2, pp. 261-272, doi: 10.1525/aa.2007.109.2.261.
Jenkins, M., Houge Mackenzie, S., Hodge, K., Hargreaves, E.A., Calverley, J.R. and Lee, C. (2022),
“Physical activity and psychological well-being during the COVID-19 lockdown: relationships
with motivational quality and nature contexts”, Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, Vol. 3,
637576, doi: 10.3389/fspor.2021.637576.
Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N. (Eds) (1999), Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic
Psychology, Russell Sage Foundation.
Kaya, M. and Erdem, C. (2021), “Students’ well-being and academic achievement: a meta-analysis
study”, Child Indicators Research, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 1743-1767, doi: 10.1007/s12187-021-
09821-4.
Kellock, A. (2020), “Children’s well-being in the primary school: a capability approach and
community psychology perspective”, Childhood, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 220-237, doi: 10.1177/
0907568220902516.
Kern, M.L. and Taylor, J.A. (2021), “Systems informed positive education”, in Kern, M.L. and
Wehmeyer, M.L. (Eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Education, Springer International
Publishing, Cham, pp. 109-135, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-64537-3_5.
Kern, M.L., Waters, L.E., Adler, A. and White, M.A. (2015), “A multidimensional approach to
measuring well-being in students: application of the PERMA framework”, The Journal of
Positive Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 262-271, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.93696.
Keyes, C.L.M. (2002), “The mental health continuum: from languishing to flourishing in life”, Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 207-222, doi: 10.2307/3090197.
HE
125,3
258
Klassen, R.M., Perry, N.E. and Frenzel, A.C. (2012), “Teachers’ relatedness with students: an
underemphasized component of teachers’ basic psychological needs”, Journal of Educational
Psychology, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 150-165, doi: 10.1037/a0026253.
Komulainen, S. (2016), “The ambiguity of the child’s ‘voice’ in social research”, Childhood, Vol. 14
No. 1, pp. 11-28, doi: 10.1177/0907568207068561.
Konu, A. and Rimpel€
a, M. (2002), “Well-being in schools: a conceptual model”, Health Promotion
International, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 79-87, doi: 10.1093/heapro/17.1.79.
Kraus, W.E., Bittner, V., Appel, L., Blair, S.N., Church, T., Despr�
es, J.P., Franklin, B.A., Miller, T.D.,
Pate, R.R., Taylor-Piliae, R.E., Vafiadis, D.K. and Whitsel, L. (2015), “The national physical
activity plan: a call to action from the American heart association: a science advisory from the
American heart association”, Circulation, Vol. 131 No. 21, pp. 1932-1940, doi: 10.1161/
CIR.0000000000000203.
Leavy, A. and Hourigan, M. (2017), “Using lesson study to support the teaching of early number
concepts: examining the development of prospective teachers’ specialized content knowledge”,
Early Childhood Education Journal, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 47-60, doi: 10.1007/s10643-016-0834-6.
Lee, R.L., Loke, A.Y., Wu, C.S. and Ho, A.P. (2010), “The lifestyle behaviours and psychosocial well-
being of primary school students in Hong Kong”, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Vol. 19 Nos 9-10,
pp. 1462-1472, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03057.x.
Liu, W., Tian, L., Scott Huebner, E., Zheng, X. and Li, Z. (2014), “Preliminary development of the
elementary school students’ subjective well-being in school scale”, Social Indicators Research,
Vol. 120 No. 3, pp. 917-937, doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0614-x.
Louv, R. (2005), “Nature deficit”, Orion, Vol. 70, p. 71.
Lundy, L. (2013), “‘Voice’ is not enough: conceptualising article 12 of the united Nations convention
on the rights of the child”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 927-942,
doi: 10.1080/01411920701657033.
Luttrell, W. (2010), “A camera is a big responsibility’: a lens for analysing children’s visual voices”,
Visual Studies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 224-237, doi: 10.1080/1472586x.2010.523274.
Martin, S. and Buckley, L. (2018), “Including children’s voices in a multiple stakeholder study on a
community-wide approach to improving quality in early years setting”, Early Child
Development and Care, Vol. 190 No. 9, pp. 1411-1424, doi: 10.1080/03004430.2018.1538135.
Mayne, F., Howitt, C. and Rennie, L. (2015), “Meaningful informed consent with young children:
looking forward through an interactive narrative approach”, Early Child Development and Care,
Vol. 186 No. 5, pp. 673-687, doi: 10.1080/03004430.2015.1051975.
McCormick, R. (2017), “Does access to green space impact the mental well-being of children: a
systematic review”, Journal of Pediatric Nursing, Vol. 37, pp. 3-7, doi: 10.1016/
j.pedn.2017.08.027.
Montreuil, M., Bogossian, A., Laberge-Perrault, E. and Racine, E. (2021), “A review of approaches,
strategies and ethical considerations in participatory research with children”, International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 20, 1609406920987962, doi: 10.1177/1609406920987962.
Morgan, A. and Waite, S. (2017), “Nestling into the world: the importance of place and mutuality in the
early years”, in Huggins, V. and Evans, D. (Eds), Early Childhood Education and Care for
Sustainability: International Perspectives, Routledge, London, pp. 51-66, doi: 10.4324/
9781315295855-5.
Nair, P. and Minhas, P. (2022), The Design of Learning Environments to Promote Student Health and
Well-being, Association for Learning Environments, eBook Version.
National Council for Special Education (2021), “Sensory spaces in schools”, available at: https://
ncse.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/NCSE-Sensory-Spaces-in-Schools-2021.pdf (accessed 29
April 2024).
National Scientific Council on the Developing Child (2015), “Supportive relationships and active skill-
building: strengthen the foundations of resilience (working paper 13)”, available at: https://
developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/The-Science-of-Resilience.pdf
Health Education
259
Navarro, D., Montserrat, C., Malo, S., Gonz�
alez, M., Casas, F. and Crous, G. (2015), “Subjective well-
being: what do adolescents say?”, Child and Family Social Work, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 175-184,
doi: 10.1111/cfs.12215.
Nohilly, M., Tynan, F., Martin, R., Pope, J., Bowles, R., Dillon, M., Farrelly, G., Harmon, M., Kitching,
N., La Cumber, G., N�
ıChroin�
ın, D. and O’Sullivan, L. (2023), “A systematic literature review to
support curriculum specification development for the area of well-being”, National Council for
Curriculum and Assessment, available at: https://ncca.ie/media/6229/ncca_a-systematic-
literature-review-to-support-the-curriculum-specification-development-for-the-area-of-well-
being.pdf
Norrish, J. (2015), Positive Education: The Geelong Grammar School Journey, Oxford University
Press, avialble at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702580.001.0001
Norrish, J.M., Williams, P., O’Connor, M. and Robinson, J. (2013), “An applied framework for positive
education”, International Journal of Wellbeing, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 147-161, doi: 10.5502/ijw.v3i2.
Osher, D., Cantor, P., Berg, J., Steyer, L. and Rose, T. (2018), “Drivers of human development: how
relationships and context shape learning and development1”, Applied Developmental Science,
Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 6-36, doi: 10.1080/10888691.2017.1398650.
Peill, F. (2022), “The pursuit of happiness: leadership challenges of recognising and supporting child
health and wellbeing in the early years”, Education Sciences, Vol. 12, p. 113, doi: 10.3390/
educsci12020113.
Pillay, H., Goddard, R. and Wilss, L. (2005), “Well-being, burnout and competence : implications for
teachers”, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 21-31, doi: 10.14221/
ajte.2005v30n2.3.
Powell, S.R., Hebert, M.A. and Hughes, E.M. (2020), “How educators use mathematics writing in the
classroom: a national survey of mathematics educators”, Reading and Writing, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 417-447, doi: 10.1007/s11145-020-10076-8.
Ramadan, D.H.A.E. (2021), “Predictors of well-being among students : a Meta – analysis”, Journal of
Research in Curriculum Instruction and Educational Technology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 123-154, doi:
10.21608/jrciet.2021.163343.
Rockett, M. and Percival, S. (2002), Thinking for Learning, A&C Black, London.
Roffey, S. (2012), “Pupil wellbeing—teacher wellbeing: two sides of the same coin?”, Educational and
Child Psychology, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 8-17, doi: 10.53841/bpsecp.2012.29.4.8.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being”, American Psychologist, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 68-
78, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2006), “Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: does
psychology need choice, self-determination, and will?”, Journal of Personality, Vol. 74 No. 6,
pp. 1557-1585, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x.
Ryff, C.D. (1989), “Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological
well-being”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 1069-1081, doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069.
Schmidt, M. and Hansson, E. (2018), “Doctoral students’ well-being: a literature review”, International
Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, Vol. 13 No. 1, 1508171, doi: 10.1080/
17482631.2018.1508171.
Scottish Government (2004), A Curriculum for Excellence: The Curriculum Review Group, Scottish
Government, available at: http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2004/11/20178/45862
Seligman, M.E.P. (2002), Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting
Fulfillment, Free Press.
Seligman, M.E.P. (2011), Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being,
Simon and Schuster.
HE
125,3
260
Seligman, M.E.P., Ernst, R.M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K. and Linkins, M. (2009), “Positive education:
positive psychology and classroom interventions”, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 35, pp.
293-311, doi: 10.1080/03054980902934563.
Slemp, G.R. (2016), “Job crafting”, in Oades, L.G., Steger, M.F., Fave, A.D. and Passmore, J. (Eds),
The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Positivity and Strengths-Based Approaches
at Work, John Wiley & Sons, London, pp. 342-365, doi: 10.1002/9781118977620.ch19.
Sloan, S., Winter, K., Connolly, P. and Gildea, A. (2020), “The effectiveness of Nurture Groups in
improving outcomes for young children with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties in
primary schools: an evaluation of Nurture Group provision in Northern Ireland”, Children and
Youth Services Review, Vol. 108, 104619, doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104619.
Soutter, A.K., O’Steen, B. and Gilmore, A. (2013), “The student well-being model: a conceptual
framework for the development of student well-being indicators”, International Journal of
Adolescence and Youth, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 496-520, doi: 10.1080/02673843.2012.754362.
Stokes, H., Turnbull, M., Forster, R. and Farrelly, A. (2019), Young People’s Voices, Young People’s
Lives: A Berry Street Education Model (BSEM) Project, University of Melbourne Graduate
School of Education, Youth Research Centre.
Street, H. (2018), Contextual Wellbeing, Wise Solutions Pty Ltd.
Suldo, S.M., Friedrich, A.A., White, T., Farmer, J., Minch, D. and Michalowski, J. (2019), “Teacher
support and adolescents’ subjective well-being: a mixed-methods investigation”, School
Psychology Review, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 67-85, doi: 10.1080/02796015.2009.12087850.
Taylor, A. (2009), Linking Architecture and Education: Sustainable Design for Learning
Environments, UNM Press, New Mexico.
Thornberg, R. and Charmaz, K. (2014), “Grounded theory and theoretical coding”, in Flick, U. (Ed.),
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, Sage, New York, pp. 153-169, doi: 10.4135/
9781446282243.n11.
Von Unger, H. (2012), “Participatory health research: who participates in what?”, Forum Qualitative
Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 13 No. 1, 7 doi: 10.17169/fqs-
13.1.1781.
Waite, S., Rogers, S. and Evans, J. (2013), “Freedom, flow and fairness: exploring how children
develop socially at school through outdoor play”, Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor
Learning, Vol. 13, pp. 255-276, doi: 10.1080/14729679.2013.798590.
Wang, C. and Burris, M.A. (1994), “Empowerment through photo novella: portraits of participation”,
Health Education Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 171-186, doi: 10.1177/109019819402100204.
Wang, Q. and Hannes, K. (2020), “Toward a more comprehensive type of analysis in photovoice
research: the development and illustration of supportive question matrices for research teams”,
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 19, 1609406920914712, doi: 10.1177/
1609406920914712.
Wang, M.-T., Degol, J.L., Amemiya, J., Parr, A. and Guo, J. (2020), “Classroom climate and children’s
academic and psychological well-being: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Developmental
Review, Vol. 57, 100912, doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2020.100912.
Waterman, A.S. (1993), “Two conceptions of happiness: contrasts of personal expressiveness
(eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 64,
pp. 678-691, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.678.
Waters, L. and Loton, D. (2019), “SEARCH: a meta-framework and review of the field of positive
education”, International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, Vol. 4 Nos 1-2, pp. 1-46, doi:
10.1007/s41042-019-00017-4.
White, M. and Kern, M.L. (2018), “Positive education: learning and teaching for well-being and
academic mastery”, International Journal of Well-being, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.5502/
ijw.v8i1.588.
White, M. and Murray, S. (2015), Evidence-based approaches to positive education in schools:
Implementing a strategic framework for well-being in schools, Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-
017-9667-5.
Health Education
261
Woods, C.B., Tannehill, D., Quinlan, A., Moyna, N. and Walsh, J. (2010), The Children’s Sport
Participation and Physical Activity Study (CSPPA), Research Report No 1, School of Health and
Human Performance, Dublin City University, and The Irish Sports Council, Dublin.
World Health Organization (2016), “World health statistics 2016: monitoring health for the sustainable
development goals”, available at: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/
9789241565264
Corresponding author
David Cashman can be contacted at: 101390180@umail.ucc.ie
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
HE
125,3
262
