Betelehem Bekele

WELLBEING OF CHILDREN
Addis Ababa University
College of Education and Behavioral Studies
School of Psychology
Determinants of Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Elementary School
Children In the case of Repi Primary School
By
Betelehem Bekele
June, 2016
By
Betelehem Bekele
A Thesis Submitted to the School of Psychology Addis Ababa University in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of
Arts in Social Psychology
June, 2016
Addis Ababa
School of Psychology
Betelhem Bekele
Approval of the Board of Examiners
1. Advisor
Name: ___________________________Signature: ____________Date:_____________
2. Internal Examiner
Name: ___________________________Signature: ____________Date:_____________
3. External Examiner
Name: ___________________________Signature: ______________Date:_____________

Abstract
This study was to assess the physical and psychological wellbeing of elementary school children
and to explore the determinant factors of psychological and physical wellbeing of elementary
school children in Repi primary school. Respondents, were recruited from one randomly selected
school in Kolfa Keranio Sub-city of Addis Ababa, The participants were: 220 elementary school
children (9 to 12 years old). Respondents were selected using simple stratified technique. A
demographic questionnaire, a psychological wellbeing scale and physical wellbeing scale was
employed to collect data. Quantitative methods of data analysis methods such as percentages,
mean, t-test, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were employed to analyze the data. The results
of the study revealed that using mean value of the psychological and physical wellbeing scale,
children physical and psychological wellbeing is low. On the other hand, ANOVA showed that
there is statistically significant difference among children mother’s educational levels in terms of
on psychological and physical wellbeing. Furthermore, the result of post Hoc comparison
revealed a significant mean difference only between mothers’ educational background in
Primary and Tertiary level. The study concludes that majority of the elementary school children
in the study site had low on psychological and physical wellbeing. Counseling and Child
Psychology should be taught to teachers and health care providers, giving considerations to the
areas when building school equality important to the class room and learning materials to
protect the physical wellbeing and safety of children.

Acknowledgements
First and for most I would like to say thank you to my God for helping me in everything. I would
like to express my gratitude to all who generously gave their time, energy and knowledge in
helping me while undertaking this research. Without the contribution of these people the study
could not have come to completion.
I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Mulat Asenake my thesis advisor, for his efforts in
providing me with relevant advice, critical comments and constructive suggestion throughout the
course of my thesis work.
Further, I would like to appreciate all my family members especially my mother and all my
friends who supported me in my study. I also want to extend my deepest gratified to all staff
members of Repi primary school for their help when collecting the information. And I would like
to express my gratified to study participants for providing me with important information.

Table of Contents
Topic Page
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ .iii
Acknowledgments..........................................................................................................................iv
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................v
List of Tables ...............................................................................................................................viii
Acronyms .................................................................................................................................. . ix
Chapter One ............................................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 11
1.1. Background of the Study ........................................................................................................ 11
1.2. Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................................... 14
1.3. Research question .................................................................................................................. 16
1.4. Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................................... 16
1.5. Significance of the Study........................................................................................................ 17
1.6. Scope of the Study ................................................................................................................. 18
1.7. Operational Definition of Terms ............................................................................................. 18
Chapter Two ......................................................................................................................................... 19
Review of Related Literature ................................................................................................................. 19
2.1. Overview of Wellbeing .......................................................................................................... 19
2.2. Theories of Wellbeing ............................................................................................................ 20
2.3. Wellbeing of Children ............................................................................................................ 21
2.4. Factors that Contribute to Wellbeing of Children .................................................................... 23
2.5. Psychological Wellbeing ........................................................................................................ 25

2.5.1. Components of Psychological Wellbeing............................................................................. 26
2.5.2. Measuring Psychological Wellbeing ................................................................................... 28
2.6. Physical Wellbeing ................................................................................................................ 29
2.7. Empirical studies Psychological and Physical Well being ....................................................... 31
Chapter Three........................................................................................................................................ 35
Method.................................................................................................................................................. 35
3.1. Research Design..................................................................................................................... 35
3.2. Participants ............................................................................................................................ 35
3.3. Instruments ............................................................................................................................ 36
3.3.2. Psychological Wellbeing Scale ........................................................................................... 36
3.4. Research Variables ................................................................................................................. 37
3.5. Procedure of Data Collection and Analysis ............................................................................. 38
3.5.1. Administration ................................................................................................................... 38
3.5.2. Scoring............................................................................................................................... 38
3.5.3. Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 39
3.6. Pilot testing ............................................................................................................................ 39
3.7. Ethical Issues ......................................................................................................................... 40
Chapter Four ......................................................................................................................................... 41
Result .................................................................................................................................................... 41
4.1. Background Information of Study Respondents ...................................................................... 41
4.2. Psychological Wellbeing of Participant .................................................................................. 44
4.3. Physical Wellbeing of Participant ........................................................................................... 47
4.4. Gender difference in psychological wellbeing......................................................................... 48
4.5. Age difference in psychological wellbeing ............................................................................. 49

4.6. Mothers’ education and psychological wellbeing (220) ........................................................... 49
4.7. Family income and psychological wellbeing ........................................................................... 51
4.8. Gender difference in physical wellbeing ................................................................................. 52
4.9. Age difference in physical wellbeing ...................................................................................... 52
4.10. Physical wellbeing difference in mothers educational back ground ......................................... 53
4.11. Family income and physical wellbeing ................................................................................... 54
Chapter Five .......................................................................................................................................... 56
Discussion ............................................................................................................................................. 56
5.1. Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Participant .............................................................. 56
5.1.1. Psychological Wellbeing ..................................................................................................... 56
5.1.2. Physical wellbeing .............................................................................................................. 56
5.2. Age difference in psychological and physical wellbeing .......................................................... 56
5.3. Gender difference in psychological and physical wellbeing .................................................... 57
5.4. Mothers Educational Background difference on Psychological wellbeing ............................... 58
5.5. Family Income difference in psychological and physical wellbeing ........................................ 59
Chapter Six ........................................................................................................................................... 61
Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendations ....................................................................................... 61
6.1. Summary .................................................................................................................................... 61
6.2. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 62
6.3 Recommendations........................................................................................................................ 63
Reference .............................................................................................................................................. 65
Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 76
List of Tables
Table Title Page
Table 1: Cronbach’s alpha of psychological wellbeing scales ………………………………….31
Table 2: Demographic characteristics of study participants……………………………...……...34

Table 3: Socio economic status of respondents ………………………………………………....35
Table 4: Total and sub scale psychological well-being for children …........................................37
Table 5: Total sub scale of psychological wellbeing level of children…………………………..38
Table 6: physical well-being for children……………………………………….……….…........39
Table 7: Total physical well-being level of children.....................................................................40
Table 8: Gender difference in psychological wellbeing …………………………………….......40
Table 9: Age difference in psychological wellbeing ………………………………………..…..41
Table10: Descriptive statistic of psychological wellbeing scores in terms of mother’s educational

level………………………..……………………………………….…………………. 41
Table11: Mother’s educational level deference in children psychological wellbeing………..….42
Table12: Descriptive statistic of psychological wellbeing scores in terms of family income

level…………………………………………………………………………………43
Table13: Family income level in children psychological wellbeing………………………….…43
Table14: Gender difference in psychological wellbeing ……………………………………..…44
Table15: Age difference in physical wellbeing ……………………………………………..…..44
Table16: Descriptive statistics of physical wellbeing scores in terms of mother’s educational

level ………………………………………………………………………………… 45
Table17: Mothers educational background and physical wellbeing...…………………………...45
Table18: Descriptive statistics of physical wellbeing scores in terms of family income
level............................................................................................................................46
Table19: Family income differences in physical wellbeing ………………………………...…..47

Acronyms
AU: Autonomy
CSA: Central Statistics Authority
DHS: Demographic and Health Survey
EM: Environmental mastery
PG: Personal growth
PL: Purpose in life
PR: Positive relations with others
SA: Self-acceptance
PWB: Psychological Well-Being
UK: united Kingdom
UN: United Nations
USAID: United Nations Program for HIV and AIDS
UNAIDS: United Nations Agency for International Development
UNICEF: United Nations Children Education Fund
WHO: World Health Organization

Chapter One
Introduction
1.1. Background of the Study
Wellbeing has been defined as “realizing one's unique potential through physical, emotional,
mental and spiritual development in relation to self, others and the environment” (Kickbusch,
2011, p. 9). It is based on a view of society in which all people have the ability to realize their
potentials and all parts of society contribute towards child well-being. Focusing on child well-
being requires a new mindset, whereby children are seen as active agents who can and should
play important part in shaping their own lives. Children should be recognized both as a specific
social group with their own rights, and as unique individuals (Bennett, 2011).
Children enjoy physical play both indoors and outdoors. They revel in freedom of movement and
in play that is inventive, adventurous and stimulating. Fine and large motor skills and hand and
eye co-ordination are developed, together with self-confidence and self-awareness. At the same
time children learn social skills as they cooperate with each other and show consideration for one
another. Good physical play can affect other areas of children’s learning, for example, it gives
children a sense of size and space, and develops their self-confidence (Becky & Merisa, 2009).
Children’s health and health behavior are the most basic indicators of well-being. Health
outcomes are closely related to poverty (Whitener, 1998). The costs for medical treatment,
medicine, dental prostheses, glasses and rehabilitative aids can be a strong barrier to families’
access to health care. But living on a low income may also be linked to a range of other risk
factors that impact on children’s health such as burdening living conditions and parents’ personal
problems. Parents with a low educational level tend to show less favorable health behavior, e.g.
in regard to, nutrition, smoking, alcohol consumption, and participation in screening tests.
Difficulties can also arise from a lack of knowledge about a healthy lifestyle and prevention, and
also about how to behave in case of illness. Cultural or language barriers and lack of
transportation can pose further barriers to parents’ access to adequate health care. Additional
health risks are linked to living in deprived and/or unsafe neighborhoods, particularly in regard
to environmental risks (e.g. air pollution) and risks of injury (Zanden, 2007).
Children at this developmental level are motivated to learn because of their natural curiosity and
their desire to understand more about themselves, their bodies, their world and influence that
different things in the world on them (Whitener, 1998).
Erikson (1963) characterized school age children’s psychological stage of life as industry versus
inferiority. During this period, children begin to gain an awareness of their unique talents and
special qualities that distinguishes them from one another. They begin to establish their self-
concept as members of a social group larger than their own unclear family and start to compare
family values with those of the outside world.
The school environment, in particular facilitates their gaining a sense of responsibility and
reliability, with less dependency on family, they extend their intimacy to include social friends
and social group (Santrock, 2006). Relation children passing through elementary and middle
school have developed the ability to concentrate for extended period can tolerate delayed
gratification, are responsible for independently carrying out activities of daily living, have a good
understanding of environment as a whole and can generalize from experience (Zanden, 2007) .
Psychological well-being is individual meaningful engagement in life, self-satisfaction, optimal
psychological functioning and development at one’s true highest potential. It has six
dimensions that are autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relationship
with other, purpose in life and self-acceptance of individuals (Ryff, 1989).
Physical well-being is the ability to be fully engaged on a regular basis, in all developmentally
appropriate activities. Activities of elementary school children that are critical to school
readiness require energy, stamina, visual and auditory acuity, and large and fine motor skills. The
promotion and maintenance of a child’s physical well-being in school require a focus on
prevention through safe and healthy environments and safe and healthy practices by staff and
children (Becky & Merisa, 2009).
Physical well-being includes health status, nutrition, preventive health care, physical activity,
safety, and security. Measures of physical well-being identified for index creation include four
sub-domains: Overall and oral health status, presence or absence of chronic conditions such as
asthma, diabetes among others, health risk behaviors, namely, eating disorders, safety of
environment and substance abuse and health promoting behaviors, namely, adequate sleep,
exercise, and time spent watching television (Brawn & Corbet, 1997).
Schools have become recognized as important places for addressing student wellbeing, In
Ethiopia schools are found in government primary schools, most schools use class Rooms that
not furnished for according to students age. Most of the government elementary schools are
located in unsafe places or are not appropriate for elementary school children education or
developmental age of elementary school children because the physical environment and facilities
is not in line with the health and developmental needs of young children (Tassew, 2011).
Some schools lack clean water and could be environmentally inadequate due to lack of spaces
for play and learning because most of them operate in buildings not originally constructed for
that purpose. There is lack of children’s books, toys and other relevant educational materials in
some of these -schools. This and other things affect the Physical and psychological wellbeing of
school age children (Tsegai, 2015).
1.2. Statement of the Problem
The importance of school age children as the developmental stage was recognized by different
scholars. The grand theorists Freud and Piaget saw middle childhood as a plateau in
development, a time when children consolidated the gains they made during the rapid growth of
the preschool period, and when they prepared for the dramatic changes of adolescence. Erik
Erikson, however, who proposed the “eight stages of man” depicted in stressed the importance of
middle childhood or elementary school children as a time when children move from home into
wider social contexts that strongly influence their development and wellbeing. Erikson viewed
the years between 7 and 11 as the time when children should develop what he called “sense of
industry” and learn to cooperate with their peers and adults. The involvement in formal
schooling and organized activities that begins during these years, introduces children to new
social roles in which they earn social status by their competence and performance.
Children who do not master the skills required in these new settings are likely to develop what
Erikson called a “sense of inferiority,” which can lead, in turn, to long-lasting intellectual,
emotional, and interpersonal consequences. So studding and assessing the psychological and
physical wellbeing of children is a very important to future wellbeing of children.
The physical and psychological wellbeing of children is affected by different environmental
things, most children in this primary school has come from poor families, and face different
problems. The relationship between low socio economic status and adverse wellbeing of children
is high, on the one hand families living in poverty include the socio-economic and demographic
characteristics associated with adverse outcomes such as jobless households, lone-parent
households, low income households and households in the social rented sector, on the other hand
the experience of living in poverty exacerbates the mental and emotional wellbeing difficulties
associated with material and social deprivation.
Studies which psychological and physical wellbeing of elementary school children in Ethiopia
are nonexistent to the knowledge of the researcher, however, various studies have were
conducted in school focusing on the equity of education and quality of education. Woodhead
(2009) on his work for young live in elementary school transition they assess the equity and
enrolment of elementary school education in Ethiopia, Tassew Weldenanna & Liyousew
Geberhiwot (2012) work on the effect of elementary school attends on later cognitive
development also Tsigai Mulugeta (2015) in his research work assess early child care and status
in Ethiopia current status and challenges, Afework Tsegaye (2013) in his work “A Comparative
Study of Psychological Wellbeing between Orphan and Non-orphan Children” assess the
wellbeing of orphan children.
The researcher has observed the problems faced on the wellbeing of elementary school children,
when teaching in Repi primary school and knows through discussions with staff workers of the
school. The researcher has assumed that these children’s physically and emotionally problem has
different reasons.
The care and support for children provided, by families or communities, has primarily focused
on addressing their economic needs especially on their basics like nutrition, education and health
care. Their psychological needs have continued to be one of the most neglected areas of support
(Awtine et al., 2005). Particularly, in most studies little attention has been given to the
psychological and physical wellbeing of children in Ethiopia. Hence, this study examines the
psychological wellbeing of elementary school children in Repi primary of Addis Ababa
1.3. Research question
On the bases of the above stated reasons and in review of the need to fill the gaps that are
excising this study tries to answer the following questions.
1. What is the status of psychological and physical well-being among children in Repi
primary school?
2. Is there gender difference in the psychological and physical well-being elementary school
children in Repi primary school?
3. Is there age difference in the psychological and physical well-being elementary school
children in Repi primary school?
4. Is there mother educational background difference in the psychological and physical
well-being elementary school children in Repi primary school?
5. Is there family income difference in the psychological and physical well-being
elementary school children in Repi primary school?
1.4. Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this study was to assess the physical and psychological wellbeing of
elementary school children in Repi primary school.
The study more specifically addressed the following specific objectives:

1. To explore the status of the psychological and physical well-being of elementary school
children.
2. To study if there is gender difference in the psychological and physical well-being
3. To study if there is age difference in the psychological and physical well-being
4. To study if mother educational background difference in the psychological and physical
well-being elementary school children in Repi primary school.
5. To study if there is family income difference in the psychological and physical well-
being elementary school children in Repi primary school.
1.5. Significance of the Study
The results of the study are believed to be helpful in the following ways: The study was assess
the status of the psychological and physical well-being of elementary school children (9 to 12)
age, as a result, the concerned bodies, policy makers, schools, family, governmental and non-
governmental organization will work together on children’s in order to increase the
psychological and physical well-being of children. This research will be important for those who
involved in policy making, school administrators, in health service, psychological service, and
in counseling to identify children who are at low level of psychological and physical wellbeing
and to improve the condition of children and prevention and intervention methods for those
children’s. The finding of this study will also provide important direction for conducting further
research in the areas of psychological and physical wellbeing of elementary school children.
1.6. Scope of the Study
The scope of this study was in Repi primary school which is found in Kolfa Keranio sub city; the
research focus was to assess the physical and psychological wellbeing of children in Repi
primary school and to explore the relationship between psychological and physical wellbeing
with socio demographic factors such as school environment and parent’s socio economic
condition.
1.7. Operational Definition of Terms
The following terms meant these definitions when used in this study
Elementary school children: - are children between grade three to six and between ages nine to
twelve in Repi primary schools.
Wellbeing: -is psychological and physical health of children in age range of nine to twelve in
Repi primary schools.
Psychological wellbeing: -is the state of psychological functioning of elementary school children
in Repi primary schools.
Physical wellbeing: - is the health and safety status of elementary school children in Repi
primary schools.
Chapter Two
Review of Related Literature
2.1. Overview of Wellbeing
There is no agreed definition of the term ‘wellbeing’ in the research literature. However, the term
is used in three main ways as follows: As a primary concept regarding the quality of people’s
lives, wellbeing is described as a dynamic process, emerging from the way in which people
interact with the world around them (Rees, Bradshaw, Goswami and Keung, 2010a). Use of the
concept has enabled a broader inquiry into all aspects of health. Recent years have witnessed an
exhilarating shift in the research literature from an emphasis on disorder and dysfunction to a
focus on well-being and positive mental health. This paradigm shift has been especially
prominent in current psychological research (e.g. Argyle, 1987; Diener, 1984; Kahneman, 1999;
Ryff and Singer, 1998a; Seligman, 1991, 2002). But it has also captured the attention of
epidemiologists, social scientists, economists, and policy makers (e.g. Huppert, 2005; Layard,
2005; Shipley, and Marks, 1997; Mulgan, 2006). This positive perspective is also enshrined in
the constitution of the World Health Organization, where health is defined as “a state of
complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or
infirmity” (WHO, 1948). More recently, the WHO has defined positive mental health as “a state
of well-being in which the individual realizes his or her own abilities, can cope with the normal
stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to his or
her community” (WHO, 2001 p. 72).

2.2. Theories of Wellbeing
Psychologists and health professionals (Campbell, 1981; Deci & Ryan, 2008) have studied well-
being extensively. While the distinct dimensions of well-being have been debated, the general
quality of well-being refers to optimal psychological functioning and experience.
There are two broad psychological traditions (Eudamanic and hedonic) have historically been
employed to explore well-being.
The Eudaimanic is deriving from ancient Greek philosophy notably the work of Aristotle and
were later championed by mills among other. Eudaimanic measures emphasis ‘‘human
flourishing’’ literally eudaimanic (wellbeing or good) and Daimonia (demon or sprit) and
virtuous action, which is argued to be not always congruent with happiness or satisfaction, but to
reflect a broader and multi-factored set of need. Hedonic measures follow the criteria of
maximizing pleasure and avoiding pain an approach dating back to ancient Greek philosophy
that found later expression in the work of Bentham and his followers (OPHI, 2007). Ryff and
Singer (1998, p.52) define eudaimonia as ‘‘the idea of striving towards excellence based on
one’s own unique potential.’’
The hedonic view equates well-being with happiness and is often operationalized as the balance
between positive and negative affect (Ryan Edward, and Deci, 2001). The eudaimonic
perspective, on the other hand, assesses how well people are living in relation to their true selves
(Waterman, Schwartz, & Conti, 2008; Ryff, 1989).
There is not a standard or widely accepted measure of either hedonic or eudaimonic well-being,
although commonly used instruments include Bradburn’s affect Balance, Neugarten’s Life
Satisfaction Index, Ryff psychological wellbeing scale, Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale, and a
variety of depression instruments (Ryan, Edward, & Deci, 2001).
Recent years have witnessed an exhilarating shift in the research literature from an emphasis on
disorder and dysfunction to a focus on well-being and positive mental health. This paradigm shift
has been especially prominent in current psychological research but it has also captured the
attention of epidemiologists, social scientists, economists, and policy makers (Huppert, 2005).
This positive perspective is also enshrined in the constitution of the World Health Organization,
where health is defined as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not
merely the absence of disease or infirmity” (WHO, 1948). More recently, the WHO has defined
positive mental health as “a state of well-being in which the individual realizes his or her own
abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is
able to make a contribution to his or her community” (Huppert, 2009, p. 168).
2.3. Wellbeing of Children
There are two prominent divides in the literature on child well-being. The first division is
between what might be termed a “developmentalist perspective” and a “child rights perspective”.
The second is between those who consider well-being outcomes from the point of view of
socially and individually costly outcomes (that is to say, indicators that measure undesirable
things like poverty, ignorance and sickness) and those who wish to take a more positive
perspective. The developmentalist perspective is more likely to be associated with a greater focus
on poor child outcomes and the child rights perspective with a focus on the positive side of child
well-being (Ben-Arieh 2006: 8-9).

The developmentalist perspective focuses on the accumulation of human capital and social skills
for tomorrow. This long view of child well-being has been described as focusing on “well-
becoming”. Wellbeing being closely tied to development, some theorists emphasis children’s
‘becoming’ (developing into adulthood), while others emphasis children’s ‘being’ (childhood as
a stage itself and children being persons in their own right) (Ben-Arieh 2006, Fattore, Mason &
Watson 2007). A critique of viewing children as ‘becoming-adults’ is that it leads to the
abstracting of children from the social and economic contexts in which they live, ignores the
complexities of individual children’s lives and risks inappropriately simplistic policy responses,
such as blaming parents for children’s lack of coping skills or poor self-esteem (Fattore, Mason
& Watson. 2007).
Research into child wellbeing has shifted from a focus on children’s survival (with a focus on
indicators of risk factors and deviance) towards a focus on the promotion of child development
(Ben-Arieh 2006). Whereas an emphasis on ‘becoming an adult’ implicitly assumes that the
child is by definition incompetent and that judgments on his/her wellbeing are dependent on
adult expert judgment, a focus on ‘being’ assumes that the children are competent and should be
able to speak for themselves (Ben-Arieh 2006). Linked to the above point, children have in
recent decades been more involved in the measuring and monitoring of their own wellbeing
(Ben-Arieh 2006).
The child rights perspective, on the other hand, places a strong rights-based emphasis on children
as human beings who experience well-being in the here-and-now. The rights perspective also
seeks the input of children in the process of deciding what their well-being might be and how it
might be best measured (Ben-Arieh, & Frones, 2007a).

From a child rights perspective well-being can be defined as the understanding of children’s
rights and the fulfillment of the opportunity for every child to be all she or he can be in the light
of a child’s abilities, potential and skills, and as a result of the effective protection and assistance
provided by families, community, society and state. The degree to which this is achieved can be
measured in terms of positive child outcomes, whereas negative outcomes and deprivation point
to the neglect of children’s rights (Ben-Arieh, Frones, 2007a).
In some cases, the differences between the two perspectives are more apparent than real, since
what is self-evidently good for the child’s current well-being may also be important for the
child’s future. For example, child abuse harms the well-being of children in the here-and-now, as
well as damaging their longer-term well-being outcomes as adults (Hood, 2007, Currie & Tekin,
2006). However, in other situations there are clear trade-offs. A child may favor his or her
current well-being, for example playing with their friends (which a child rights perspective might
support), over learning in school to improve future life-time prospects (which a developmentalist
perspective might support).
2.4. Factors that Contribute to Wellbeing of Children
The social and economic circumstances into which children are born and in which children are
reared are significant contributors to adverse outcomes. Living in poverty has been found to lead
to poor child physical and psychological wellbeing, lower educational attainment (Pantazis,
2004).
The relationship between low socio economic status and adverse wellbeing of children is
complex. On the one hand families living in poverty include the socio-economic and
demographic characteristics associated with adverse outcomes such as jobless households, lone-
parent households, low income households and households in the social rented sector (Pantazis,
2004). On the other hand the experience of living in poverty exacerbates the mental and
emotional difficulties associated with material and social deprivation (Fabian Society, 2006).
Hall and Hall (2007) conclude that: ‘Poverty, poor housing and lack of social support are
recurring themes in the literature on poor physical wellbeing and mental health, social exclusion,
off ending behavior and child abuse. According to a research conducted in US America (Cabinet
Office Social Exclusion Task Force, 2007), children’s in elementary school have low physical
wellbeing compare to children in high schools.
Large family is associated with physical sicknesses, including asthma, respiratory tract
infections, developmental problems, musculo-skeletal problems, dental problems and skin
conditions; lowered immune state as a result of ongoing stress and high rates of accidents
(Fabian Society, 2006).
A recent study undertaken in Scotland to examine the relationship between parents educational
and health found that ‘certain dimensions of housing, for example occupation and house type,
appear to have some association with specific aspects of health’ (Fabian Society, 2006), for
example heating, house type and occupation were predictive of children’s respiratory health
status, however no link was found between damp and condensation and children’s respiratory
problems (Grainger & Robinson, 2004).
A report commissioned by the homelessness and housing charity Shelter in UK concluded that
poor housing conditions were responsible for a range of physical and mental health problems as
well as having an impact on educational attainment, cognitive development and behavioral
problems. Children living in overcrowded and unfit accommodation were more likely to contract
meningitis and tuberculosis, as well as more common infections, overcrowding and noise from
neighboring properties was found to induce poor sleeping patterns; living and growing-up in
sub-standard housing increased the risk of suffering mental ill-health, including depression and
chronic stress (Harker, 2006).
2.5. Psychological Wellbeing
Psychological well-being plays a crucial role in theories of personality and development in both
pure and applied forms; it provides a baseline from which we assess psychopathology; it
serves as a guide for clinical work by helping the counselor determine the direction clients might
move to alleviate distress and find fulfillment, purpose, and meaning; and it informs goals and
objectives for counseling-related interventions (Perez, 2012).
Psychological well-being is about lives going well. It is the combination of feeling good and
functioning effectively. Sustainable well-being does not require individuals to feel good all the
time; the experience of painful emotions (e.g. disappointment, failure, grief) is a normal part of
life, and being able to manage these negative or painful emotions is essential for long-term well-
being. Psychological well-being is, however, compromised when negative emotions are extreme
or very long lasting and interfere with a person’s ability to function in his or her daily life
(Huppert, 2009).
Ryff’s (1989) defined well-being is the optimal psychological functioning and experience.
Dahalback (2008) defines psychological well-being as that state of a mentally healthy person
who possesses a number of positive mental health qualities such as active adjustment to the
environment and unity of personality Dzuka and Dalbert (2000) defined psychological well-
being is the overall satisfaction and happiness or the subjective report of one’s mental state of
being healthy, satisfied or prosperous and broadly to reflect quality of life and mood states.
Deci and Ryan (2008) defined Psychological well-being refers to living life in a full and deeply
satisfying manner. This conceptualization maintains that well-being is not so much an outcome
or end state as a process, and is concerned with living well or actualizing one’s human potentials.
2.5.1. Components of Psychological Wellbeing
Ryff (1989) critiqued research on subjective well-being for what she saw as its impoverished
theoretical basis. She acknowledged that current approaches to subjective well-being have been
extensively evaluated and that psychometrically solid measures have been constructed (Perez,
2012).
Ryff (1989) developed an alternative approach to well-being that she refers to as psychological
well-being. Synthesizing ideas from the personality theories of Malsow, Jung, Rogers, Allport,
Erikson, Buhler, Neurgartens, & Jahoda, she constructed a measure of well-being around six
subscales: Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Positive Relations with Others, and Purpose in
life, Personal Growth, and Self-Acceptance.
Autonomy
Ryff (1989) equates autonomy with attributes such as self-determination, independence, internal
locus of control, individuation, and internal regulation of behavior. Underlying these attributes is
the belief that one’s thoughts and actions are one’s own and should not be determined by
agencies or causes outside one’s control. The fully functioning person is described as having an
internal locus of evaluation, whereby one does not look to others for approval, but evaluates
oneself by personal standards (Ryff & Singer, 1996).
Environmental Mastery
Ryff’s (1989) defined environmental mastery as the ability to choose or create environments that
is suitable to whom they are as a person, as well as the ability to be flexible in various
environmental settings.
Positive Relations with Others
Ryff (1989) defined positive relations with others as warm, trusting interpersonal relations and
strong feelings of empathy and affection. At first glance this subscale/criterion seems most
sympathetic to or compatible with collectivism. However, there is a significant difference
between having relations with others and being psychologically constituted by one’s location in a
social network (Perez, 2012).
Many of the preceding theories emphasize the importance of warm, trusting interpersonal
relations. The ability to love is viewed as a central component of mental health.
Self-actualization
Self-actualizers are described as having strong feelings of empathy and affection for all human
beings and as being capable of greater love, deeper friendship, and more complete identification
with others. Warm relating to others is posed as a criterion of maturity (Ryff & Singer, 1998).
Personal Growth
Ryff (1989) defined personal growth as the continuing ability to develop one’s potential, to grow
and expand as a person. Openness to experience, for example, is a key characteristic of the fully
functioning person. Such an individual is continually developing, rather than achieving a fixed
state wherein all problems is solved. Life-span theories also give explicit emphasis to continued
growth and to facing new challenges to tasks at different periods of life (Ryff & Singer, 1998).
The dimension of personal growth parallels Aristotelian conceptions of human excellence,
human flourishing, and the realization of one's true potential (waterman, 1993). Eudaimonistic
accounts of ethics and the good life in fact, to the imperative to know oneself (one’s daimon) and
to choose to turn it, as completely as possible, from an ideal to an actuality (Ryff & Singer,
1998).
Self-Acceptance
Ryff (1989) maintained that holding positive attitudes toward oneself emerges as a central
characteristic of positive psychological functioning. This is defined as a central feature of mental
health as well as characteristic of self-actualization, optimal functioning, and maturity. Life span
theories also emphasize acceptance of one's self and one's past life. Thus, holding positive
attitudes toward oneself emerges as a central characteristic of positive psychological functioning
(Ryff & Singer, 1998). Ideas of self-love, self-esteem, and self-respect are also evident in lists of
criteria goods showing parallels to self-acceptance.
2.5.2. Measuring Psychological Wellbeing
Ryff and Singer (1998) have explored the question of well-being in the context of developing a
lifespan theory of human flourishing. Also drawing from Aristotle, they describe well-being not
simply as the attaining of pleasure, but as “the striving for perfection that represents the
realization of one’s true potential” (Ryff, 1995, p. 156). Ryff and Keyes (1995) thus spoke of
psychological well-being as distinct from Subjective Well-being and presented a
multidimensional approach to the measurement of Psychological wellbeing that taps six distinct
aspects of human actualization: autonomy, personal growth, and self-acceptance, purpose in life,
mastery, and positive relatedness. These six constructs define Psychological wellbeing both
theoretically and operationally and they specify what promotes emotional and physical health
(Ryff & Singer, 1998). They have presented evidence, for example, that Eudaimonic living, as
represented by psychological wellbeing, can influence specific physiological systems relating to
immunological functioning and health promotion.
Psychological wellbeing is measured through different assessment devices such as self-reported
questionnaire, informant reports, memory measures, interview, behavioral observation and
biological measures. Taken together these measures provide a more accurate assessment of
Psychological wellbeing (Girum, 2012).
2.6. Physical Wellbeing
The physical well-being and its measures include the areas of nutrition, preventative
health care, physical activity, physical safety and security, reproductive health and drug
Use (Bornstein, 2003). One unequivocal constant across the physical well-being literature is
that school programs that support physical well-being lead to positive health outcomes (Blanksby
& Whipp, 2004, Bornstein et al., 2003, Luepker, Perry, Mckinly, Parcel & Ston ).
The association between health status and well-being seems clean. Sickness is often associated
with displeasure or pain, so the presence of illness might directly increase negative affect.
Further, illness often presents functional limitations, which can detract from opportunities for
positive affect and life satisfaction, (Ryan & Frederick 1997).
Empirical results have supported these speculations. Specifically, an early meta-analysis by
Okun (1984) relating self-reported physical health to subjective wellbeing found an average
correlation of 0.32. However, the relation seems to be more complex than one might expect.
Some people with objectively poor health have high subjective wellbeing, whereas, conversely,
some people with low well-being have no signs of somatic illness. Befitting these observations,
Okun et al found that when health was rated by others (e.g. doctors) the correlation dropped
noticeably to 0.16. This suggests that the meaning and construal of health states may be a major
factor in subjective wellbeing. Subjective wellbeing is, after all, subjective, so one would expect
it to be affected by personality and by interpretive and reporting styles.
Ryan and Frederick (1997), assessed subjective vitality, a positive and phenomenological
accessible state of having energy available to the self, and used it as an indicator of eudaimonic
well-being. They found that subjective strength not only correlated with psychological factors
such as personal autonomy and relatedness, but that it also correlated with physical symptoms.
That is, more physical symptoms in a day predicted decreased energy and aliveness for that day,
as did poor health habits such as smoking and fatty diets. They argued that physical wellbeing is
a phenomenally relevant variable that is affected by both somatic and psychological factors.
Ryff and Singer (2000,) used both empirical and case study evidence to underscore how various
dimensions of eudaimonic living yield healthy effects on health more generally, including lower
allostatic load and better autoimmune functioning. Their work indicated that the PWB dimension
of positive relationships with others was particularly critical to the promotion of health-related
processes.
Compared with non-poor children, poor children in the United States experience diminished
psychological health as measured by a number of indicators of health status and outcomes. In the
1988 National Health Interview Survey, parents reported that poor children were only two-thirds
as likely to be in excellent psychological health and almost twice as likely to be in fair or poor
health as non-poor children (Duncan & Rodgers, 1988)
Previous research suggests that mother’s education is an important determinant of the health and
physical wellbeing of children. Potential mechanisms behind this relationship are that educated
mothers have better knowledge about health care and nutrition, healthier behavior, and that they
can provide safer and more sanitary environments for their children (Behrman & Deolalikar,
1988) more educated mothers generally have a better health status which leads to better health
through biology (Wolfe & Behrman, 1987).
Lawson and Mace (2008) use the British Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children
dataset, and find that children from larger families are unhealthy and have a lower growth rate
than the comparison group.
2.7. Empirical studies Psychological and Physical Well being
Among the general population, gender differences in psychological functioning and health are
well recognized (Dekker et al., 2007). During childhood, the prevalence of psychiatric disorders
is significantly higher in boys, while in adulthood, women have twice the risk of depression
compared to men (Strunk, Lopez & De Rubeis, 2006). In Africa gender plays an important role
in the socio-cultural set up of families and societies.

Parenting practices, socialization, roles and expectations differ according to the sex of the child.
This makes investigation into gender difference among children on psychological distress is
critical (Dahlback, 2008). Compared to girls, boys were found to show lower self-awareness and
to perform more poorly at school (He and Ji, 2007 & Rutter, 2008).
A study conducted in 578 children in Bangladesh demographic characteristics show some
differential effects for wellbeing and ill-being Youngblade and Dunn 1995; Fisher 1992 indicate
that family size and parental education have high effect physical wellbeing, but the effect of
gender is much less clear when it comes to mental and physical well-being. Most large surveys
showed little evidence of gender differences (e.g. Donovan & Halpern, 2002; Helliwell, 2003).
Some showed higher scores for men (e.g. Stephens, Dulberg, & Joubert, 1999), while others
showed higher scores for women on some sub-scales such as those assessing social functioning
(e.g. Ryff & Singer, 1998).
Girls tend to suffer from more emotional difficulties, whereas boys tend to have more behavioral
problems. For example, depression increases from the early teens to the mid-twenties for both
girls and boys (Kessler, Avenevoli & Merikangas, 2001), but girls show larger increases than
boys during this period (Hankin, Abramson, Moffitt, Silva, McGee & Angell, 1998). Boys
however, tend to show a greater increase in their engagement in problem behaviors than girls
(Bongers, Koot, Van der Ende & Verhulst, 2004), although behavioral problems often peak in
early to middle adolescence and then decline in later adolescence for both genders (Hirschi &
Gottfredson, 1983). This gender difference may be due, in part, to the way in which boys and
girls react to stressful periods and traumatic events. Boys are more likely to externalize their
behaviors by acting up, whereas girls tend to internalize their problems, leading to depression,
anxiety and other psychological problems (Gutman, Brown, Akerman & Obolenskaya, 2010).A
study among US college samples showed gender difference in depression scores, with women
reporting more frequent experience of depression. While women showed to be as happy as the
men in the study of Goodenow, 1993, a more recent study however showed similarity in the
experience of affect between males and females (Gutman & Feinstein, 2008).
Contrasting findings same components of psychological well-being between the genders were
also noted. Previous researches claim the distressingly low self-esteem among female than men
however, recent researches report that gender difference in self-esteem ranged only from small to
medium effect sizes (Perez, 2012). Autonomy was also found to be different between the genders
where boys showed higher autonomy than girls and was associated with greater parental
disobedience and also earlier study, women showed higher score in personal growth than men
(Ryff, Lee, Essex, & Schmutte, 1994). In a later study, no difference was found in personal
growth between the genders (Ryff & Keyes, 1995).
Likewise, there was also no difference between the boys and girls in environmental mastery
(Ryff & Keyes, 1995).
According to Perez (2012) females are significantly higher scores in the aspects of daily spiritual
experience, relationship with father, relationship with peer, positive relationship with others and
purpose in life, male in other side higher scores autonomy than their female and there is no
significant gender difference in terms of environmental mastery, personal growth and self-
acceptance (Perez, 2012).
According to the statistical report on the Health of Canadians (1994/95) three indicators of
Psychological well-being were assessed across a wide range of ages in the population the three
measures used were high self-esteem, high mastery and high sense of coherence. For twelve to
fourteen years olds 36 percent indicated having high self-esteem, 7 percent indicated having high
mastery and data was unavailable for sense of coherence, for fifteen to seventeen years olds, 41
percent indicated having high self -eseteem,16 percent indicated having high mastery, and data
was unavailable for sense of coherence. For eighteen and nineteen years olds, 41 percent
indicated having high self-esteem, 21 percent indicated having high mastery and 12 percent
indicating having sense of coherence (Goodenow, 1993).

Chapter Three
Method
3.1. Research Design
The study was descriptive in its nature which involves a descriptive survey. It is descriptive since
it tried to assess the level of psychological and physical well-being of elementary school children
in Repi primary schools. It also investigates the relationship between psychological and physical
wellbeing with socio demographic characteristics of elementary school children in Repi primary
school of Addis Ababa.
3.2. Participants
The study was conducted in Addis Ababa capital city of Ethiopia; in Kolfa Keranio sub city Repi
primary school. There are 21 primary schools in the sub-city which would enable the selection of
children. From these schools, one was selected using lottery method.
The required sample size for this study was 20% of the population which is recommended by
Huck (2004). According to him, incorporating a minimum sample size of 20 % from a
population is representative to conduct a survey. The target population consists of elementary
school children in Repi primary school whose ages range between 9 and 12 years old and whose
grade level was from three to six. The total number of population was 1098 from this number
220 (20%) of children taken as a sample. The sampling technique that employed was stratified
random sampling; proportional number children were selected from each grade level according
to age and gender using lottery method sampling.

3.3. Instruments
The instrument that was used to assess psychological wellbeing of children was Ryff
psychological wellbeing scale, and the instrument that was used to assess the physical wellbeing
children was physical wellbeing scale were used to assess the status of children physical
wellbeing. Both psychological and physical wellbeing scales content validity were checked by
three MA holder psychologists.
In order to explored the association between socio demographic factor and children’s
psychological and physical wellbeing respondent were asked to provide information regarding
their socio economic status such as age, sex, grade level, fathers’ and mother s’ educational
background, family income and family size.
3.3.1. Physical Wellbeing Scale
Physical wellbeing scales which have six level of scale were developed by the researcher to and
used to assess the status of children physical wellbeing.
3.3.2. Psychological Wellbeing Scale
In order to assess the psychological wellbeing of elementary school children (elementary school
children) self-rated, Ryff's 54 items Psychological Well-Being Scale were used. Originally the
scale was in English language it was translated from English to Amharic by language
professional then it was re-translated to English by another language professional.
Ryff Psychological Wellbeing Scale is originally consisted of 120 theoretically defined (theory-
driven) items (20 per scale). Currently, there are various reduced versions of this instrument (84,
54, 42, and 18 items), translated into at least 18 different languages (Ryff and Singer, 1998).
The scale consists of a series of statements reflecting the six areas of psychological well-being:
Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Personal Growth, Positive Relations with Others, purpose in
Life, and Self-acceptance. The six subscales have high levels of internal consistency and high
correlation with the 20-item parent scale. The levels of internal consistency and correlation with
the parent scale were; Autonomy 0.83 and 0.97, personal growth 0.85 and 0.97, environmental
mastery .86 and .98, purpose in life 0.88 and 0.98, positive relations with others 0.88 and 0.98
and self-acceptance 0.91 and 0.99, respectively (www.Liberal arts.wabash.edu).
Respondents were indicated their response on 6 point liker-type scale, which higher scores on
each scale indicating greater wellbeing on each dimension, total psychological wellbeing score
were calculated by adding all 6 construct. The number of responses made by the subject on each
question depends whether the question is positive or negative. If it is a positive question
responses are rated from 1 to 6, where a score of 6 indicates strong agreement. If it is a negative
question scoring done is in reverse order which is from 6 to 1, where 6 indicated strong
disagreement. For each category, a high score indicates that a respondent has a mastery of that
area in his/her life. Conversely a low score shows that the respondent struggles to feel
comfortable with that particular concept (Srimathi and Kumar, 2010).
3.4. Research Variables
Independent variables in this study were:-
1. Mothers education level
2. Family income
3. Gender and
4. Age
Dependent Variables:-
Psychological and physical well-being was the dependent variable in this research. The
psychological wellbeing has six dimensions: Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Personal
Growth, Positive Relations with Others, Purpose in Life, and Self-acceptance. The physical
wellbeing consists of student health status.
3.5. Procedure of Data Collection and Analysis
3.5.1. Administration
After the pretesting, the final tool was produced. Once the tool had been finalized, the researcher
together with two assistants met the participants and oriented them about the purpose of the
research and the tool intended to be used. The children were asked to fill the questionnaire with
the presence of the researcher and the two assistances. They were allowed to ask for help or
clarification whenever they had problem in understanding any question. Once data collection is
completed the researcher identified complete and incomplete questionnaires. Accordingly since
the questionnaires had been filled in the presence of the researcher and her two assistants there
were no questionnaire which is considered as incomplete and excluded from the analysis.
3.5.2. Scoring
The psychological wellbeing scale contains 46 items to be rated on six point Likert - type scale
from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6).
Items 5,7,9,10,11,13,14,18,19,21,22,23,25,27,30,32,34,38,39,40 & 41 are scored reversely.
However, the rest of the items are presented as positive statements.
The physical wellbeing scale consists of six items to be rated on six point Likert - type scale
from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6).

In order to determine the status of Psychological and physical wellbeing, score blow the mean
taken as low level of psychological and physical wellbeing (Afework, 2013).
3.5.3. Data Analysis
After data collection, items were coded in a way that will be suitable for data analysis.
SPSS (Statistical package for social science) Computer software version 20 was used to code and
analyze the data collected using the questionnaire. Descriptive statistical measures (frequency,
percentage, means scores and standard deviation) were used to describe the general pattern of
psychological and physical wellbeing of the respondents in line with the socio demographic
backgrounds. Information obtained from psychological wellbeing scale was analyzed using
independent t-test and one way ANOVA to compare mean difference between males and
females, age groups, mother’s educational level and family income, and to their psychological
wellbeing.
3.6. Pilot testing
The aim of pilot test was to solve ambiguity (clarity and language), to check reliability and
feasibility of the instrument. In the present study, the Amharic version of the instrument was
administered to 30 children from Repi primary schools.
No time limit was made for the completion of the questionnaire. Item-total correlation was
computed for each sub-scale of the Psychological Wellbeing Scale. Based on the criterion of
0.30 as an acceptable corrected item–total correlation (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), eight items
were identified as unacceptable. Three items from the personal growth sub-scale, three questions
from the purpose in life sub-scale, and two from the self-acceptance sub-scale were not included
in the final study instrument.

Internal consistency reliability of the Amharic versions of the instrument was determined for the
total and for the subscales using Cronbach’s alpha. The computed Cronbach’s alpha coefficients
were 0.8 Autonomy, 0.77, Environmental mastery, 0.75 Positive relation with other, 0.7 Self-
acceptance, 0.76 Personal growths, 0.77 Purpose in life and total psychological wellbeing scale
scales were 0.89 as shown in table one.
Table 1
Cronbach’s alpha of psychological wellbeing scales
AU EM PR SA PL PG PWB
Cronbach’s alpha. .8 .77 .75 .7 .76 .77 .089
3.7. Ethical Issues
This research was conducted by taking all ethical issues of a research in to considerations. First,
before gathering data from different sources, the researcher was introduced the purpose of the
study and was reached an agreement with all the respondents parents and school principals.
Regarding the consent, the researcher informed them that they can withdraw from participant the
research at any time and in any circumstance if they do not feel comfort. And all information was
gathered based on the consent.
The clarification mainly incorporated information about the aims of the research, extent and
procedures of confidentiality and ambiguity and about the voluntary nature of the research even
they can quit in the middle of their participation.

Chapter Four
Result
The results of the study are presented in line with the research questions in different parts. The
first part focuses on the background information of the respondents, the second part presents the
psychological wellbeing of elementary school children, the third one is about physical wellbeing
of elementary school children, and the fourth part presents the relationships between
demographic variables and psychological and physical well-being.
4.1. Background Information of Study Respondents
In this section, the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are presented. The socio-
demographic characteristics analyzed include the age, gender, grade level, family income, family
size and fathers and mothers education l background. Table 1 and Table 2 show summery result
the socio-demographic information about the study participants.

Table 2
Demographic characteristics of study participants (N=220)
Variable No %
Sex Male 108 49.1
Female 112 50.9
Total 220 100
Age 9-10 106 48.9
11-12 114 51.1
Total 220 100
Grade 3 -4 109 49.5
5-6 111 50.5
Total 220 100
As it is shown in Table 2, out of 220 children 108 (49.1%) were boys and 112 (50.9 %) were
girls. Concerning the age range of respondents, out of 220, 106(48.9%) were in the age of 9 - 10
years and 114(51.1%) were in the age range of 11-12 years. Regarding their grade level
109(49.5%) was grade 3-4 and 111 (50.5 %) was 5-6 respectively. The number of sampled
female children is higher than that of male children and number of children in grade level of 5 - 6
higher than children in grade 5 -6.

Table 3
Socio economic status of respondents (220)
Variables N %
Family income 500 44 20

1000 82 37.3
1500 46 20.9
2000 48 21.9
Total 220 100
Mothers Educational Background
Mother Illiterate 40 18.2
Elementary level 119 54.1
Secondary level 37 16.8
Tertiary level and above 24 10.4
Total 220 100
Family size 2 to 4 41 18.6
5 to 8 119 54.1
˃ 9 to 12 60 27.3
Total 220 100
As shown in table 3, from 220 children 44 (20%) came from families income below 500. 82
(37.3%) of children’s families income ranges between 500-1000. 46(20.9%) children came from
their families income ranges from 1000-1500. 25(11.4) of them came from families with income
between 1500-2000 and the rest 23(10.5%) of children came from whose families income were
2000-3000 and above holders.

Regarding mothers education 40(18.2%) of them were illiterate, 37(16.8%) of them were
elementary level, 119(54.1%) of them were secondary school, 24(10.4%) of them were tertiary
level.
Regarding family size 41(18.6%) of children were came from whose family size were 2 to 4.
One hundred nineteen(54.1%) of children came from whose family size were 5 to 8 and
60(27.3%) of children came from family size of 9 to 12 and above.
4.2. Psychological Wellbeing of Participant
The minimum, maximum, mean, standard deviation scores and sum total were calculated to
summarize the raw data for the total and sub-scales of psychological and physical well-being
treated in the study. The results are presented in table 3.
To find out the status of the psychological well-being and physical of children, percentage values
and alternatively frequency counts were computed. To determine the levels of psychological
wellbeing as high and low, mean split was used. Mean scores were determined for each
dimension and for the total psychological wellbeing.
Accordingly, the mean scores were 147.66 the total psychological well-being.
Those who scored above the mean were considered as having high levels and those who scored
below the mean were considered as having low levels of psychological wellbeing. The result is
shown in Table 4.
Table 4
Total and sub scale psychological well-being for children (N=220)
Male Female
Variable Mean Standard Mean Standard
Deviation deviation
AU 20.9 3.14 28.7 5.07
EM 29.9 5.72 30.1 5.87
PR 26.96 6.66 27.5 6.38
SA 24.2 4.80 24.1 4.08
PL 19.1 2.74 20.9 2.86
PG 26.1 4.08 27.7 5.23
PWB 147.66 27.14 159 33.87
AU autonomy, EM environmental mastery, PR positive relation with others, SA self-acceptance,
PL purpose in life, PG personal growth and PWB psychological wellbeing scale.
Table 4 shows that the lowest mean scores, for both male and female, were obtained for sub
scales of purpose in life and autonomy on males. On the other hand the sub scales with the
highest mean include autonomy for females, environmental mastery and positive relation with
others. In the total psychological wellbeing scale, the mean scores of male are 147.66 while for
females it is 159. This means the mean of females on the total psychological wellbeing scale is
slightly higher than that of male.

Table 5
The total sub scale of psychological wellbeing level of children (N=220)
variable High Low
Male Female Total Male Female Total
No % No % No % No % No % No %
AU 49 45.4 43 38.4 92 41.8 59 54.6 69 61.6 128 58.2
EM 49 45.4 51 45.5 100 45.5 59 54.6 61 54.5 120 54.5
PR 49 45.4 52 46.42 101 45.9 59 54.6 60 53.6 119 54.1
SA 52 48.2 55 49.1 107 48.6 56 51.8 57 50.9 113 51.4
PL 45 41.7 55 49.1 100 45.5 63 58.3 57 50.9 120 54.5
PG 47 43.51 53 47.32 100 45.5 61 56.5 59 52.7 120 54.5
PWB 48 44.4 52 45.5 100 45.5 60 55.6 60 54 120 54.5
Note:- AU autonomy, EM environmental mastery, PR positive relation with others, SA self-
acceptance, PL purpose in life, PG personal growth and PWB psychological wellbeing scale.
As shown in Table 5, 92(41.8%) respondents scored high on autonomy among these 49(45.4%)
were males and 43(38.4%) were females and 128(58.2%) had low score out of which 59(54.6%)
were males and 69(61.6%) were females.
On environmental mastery, 100(45.5%) of the subjects had higher scores out of which 49(45.4%)
were males and 51(45.5%) were females and 120(54.5%) had low score out of which 59(54.6%)
were male and 61(54.5%) were female. On positive relation with others, 101(45.9%) of the
subjects had higher scores out of which 49(45.4%) were male and 52(46.42%) were females and
119(54.1%) had low score out of which 59(54.6%) were male and 60(53.6%) were females.
On self-acceptance 107(48.6%) of the responds higher score out of which 52(48.2%) were male
and 55(49.1%) were female 113(51.4%) had low score out of which 56(51.8%) were male and
57(50.9) were female. On purpose in life, 100(45.5%) respondents high scored out of which
45(41.7%) were males and 55(49.1%) were females and 120(54.5%) had score low out of which
63(58.3%) were males and 57(50.9%) were females.
With regard to personal growth 100(45.5%) had high scores out of which 47(43.51%) were
males and 53(47.32%) were females and 120(54.5%) scored low out of which 61(56.5%) were
males and 20(52.7%) were females. Regarding the total psychological wellbeing, 100(45.5%) of
children have high psychological wellbeing whereas 120(54.5%) of them had low psychological
wellbeing.
4.3. Physical Wellbeing of Participant
Table 6
Physical well-being for children (N=220)
Variable Male Female
Physical Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation
wellbeing 20.7 4.62 20.9 4.09
As seen in table 6 the mean score for male and female is almost the equal; 20.7 for male and 20.9
for female respondents with standard deviation values of 4.62 and 4.09 respectively.
Table 7
Total physical well-being level of children (N=220)
Variable High Low
Male Female Total Male Female Total
No % No % No % No % No % No %
Physical 52 48.1 55 49 107 48.6 56 51.9 57 51 113 51.4
wellbeing
As table 7 show that 107(48.6) scored high on physical wellbeing among those 52(48%) were
males and 55(49%) were females, 113(51.4%) score low in physical wellbeing among those
56(51%) were males and 57(51%) were females.
4.4. Gender difference in psychological wellbeing
Table 8
Gender difference in psychological wellbeing (N=220)
Mean SD Mean SD t p
PWB*score 171.61 29.81 168.21 34.24 .854 .394
As indicated in table 8, an independent sample t test was employed to compare the mean
difference in the psychological wellbeing of male (M=171.61, SD=29.81) and female
(M=168.21, SD=34.24) elementary school children. The analysis failed to reveal statistically
significant difference (t =0.854, df =198, p >0.05). The result suggests that gender does not have
any effect on elementary school children’s psychological wellbeing.
4.5. Age difference in psychological wellbeing
Table 9
Age difference in psychological wellbeing (N=220)
Variable Age 9 -10 Age 11-12
Mean SD Mean SD t p
PWB*score 162.7 26.9 172.21 .24 .421 .251
difference in the psychological wellbeing of age group of 9 -10 (M=162.7, SD=26.9) and age 11-
12 (M=172.21, SD=24.) elementary school children. The analysis failed to reveal statistically
significant difference (t =0.221, df =198, p >251.). The result suggests that age has effect on
elementary school children’s psychological wellbeing.
4.6. Mothers’ education and psychological wellbeing (220)
Table 10
Descriptive statistic of psychological wellbeing scores in terms of mother’s educational level

(N=220)
Variable Illiterate Elementary level Secondary level Tertiary level
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
PWB score 142.2 31.1 156 37.2 172.64 39.4 128.75 32.1
As shown in table 10, the mean score of psychological wellbeing of children of their mothers
education secondary level (M=172.64, SD=39.4) elementary school children is higher than that
of Illiterate (M=142.2, SD=31.1) elementary level (M=156, SD=37.2) and tertiary level
(M=128.75, SD=32.1).
Table 11
Mother’s educational level deference in children psychological wellbeing (220)
Source of variation Some of square Df Mean square F Sig.
Between group 8784.451 3 4392.226 4.211 .016
within group 298335.487 116 1043.131
Total 307119.938 219
As presented in table 11, the computed one way ANOVA indicated that there is statistically
significant difference in psychological wellbeing (F=4.211, df =219, p<0.05) among elementary
school children who differ in their mothers educational level. Hence, maternal education can be
considered as one of the determinant factors of elementary children level of psychological
wellbeing. However, the above ANOVA table does not show where the exact variation among
the groups lies. Hence, in order to see the specific significant mean differences among the
groups, Tukey HSD post Hoc comparison were performed. The result revealed that there is
significant mean difference between elementary school children whose mother educational
background are in primary and Tertiary level , in which the mean difference is 16.67 and level
of significant is 0.048 at α= .05. But there is no significant difference among other groups.
4.7. Family income and psychological wellbeing
Table 12
Descriptive statistic of psychological wellbeing scores in terms of family income level

(N=220)
Variable 500 1000 1500 2000
PWB score 153.6 34.2 158.2 38.43 164.5 38.4 175.6 38.9
As shown in table 12, the mean score of psychological wellbeing of children of their families’
income level 2000, (M=175.6, SD=38.9) elementary school children is higher than that of 500,
(M=153.6, SD=34.2) 1000, (M=158.2, SD=38.4) and 1500 (M=164.4, SD=38.4).
Table 13
Family income level in children psychological wellbeing (N=220)
Between group 9894.897 3 4552.226 6.89 .017
within group 288335.649 116 1043.131
Total 393678.769 219
significant difference in psychological wellbeing (F=6.89, df =219, p<0.05) among elementary
school children who differ in their family income level. Hence, family income level can be
considered as one of the determinant factors of elementary children level of psychological
wellbeing.
4.8. Gender difference in physical wellbeing
Table 14
Gender difference in psychological wellbeing (N=220)
Mean SD Mean SD t p
PWB*score 147.52 34.7 172.82 36.9 .756 .428
difference in the physical wellbeing of male (M=147.52, SD=34.7) and female (M=172.82,
SD=36.9) elementary school children. The analysis failed to reveal statistically significant
difference (t =0.756, df =198, p >0.428). The result suggests that gender does not have any effect
on elementary school children’s physical wellbeing.
4.9. Age difference in physical wellbeing
Table 15
Age difference in physical wellbeing (220)
Variable Age 9 -10 Age 11-12
Mean SD Mean SD t p
PWB*score 156.71 32.87 168.97 .34.98 .321 .368
difference in the physical wellbeing of age group of 9 -10 (M=156.71, SD=32.87) and age 11-12
(M=168.97, SD=34.98) elementary school children. The analysis failed to reveal statistically
significant difference (t =0.321, df =198, p < 0.368). The result suggests that age has effect on
elementary school children’s psychological wellbeing.
4.10. Physical wellbeing difference in mothers educational back ground
Table 16
Descriptive statistic of physical wellbeing scores in terms of mother’s educational level
(N=220)
Variable Illiterate Elementary level Secondary level Tertiary level
PWB score 162.6 34.81 158.67 38.2 169.46 39.93 174.46 31.2
As shown in table 16, the mean score of physical wellbeing of children by their mothers
educational background Tertiary level (M=174.46, SD=31.2) elementary school children is
higher than that of Illiterate (M=162.6, SD=34.81) elementary level (M=158, SD=38.2) and
secondary level (M=169.46, SD=39.93).
Table 17
Mothers educational background and physical wellbeing (N=220)
Between group 99824.541 3 4782.683 3.241 .5
within group 278422.487 116 2467.543
Total 307119.938 219

significant difference in physical wellbeing (F=3.241, df =219, p<0.5) among elementary school
children who differ in their mothers educational level. Hence, maternal education can be
considered as one of the determinant factors of elementary children level of physical wellbeing.
4.11. Family income and physical wellbeing
Table 18
Descriptive statistic of physical wellbeing scores in terms of family income level (N=220)
Variable 500 1000 1500 2000
PWB score 156.9 31.2 161.53 37.46 157.42 33.89 169.86 37.8
As shown in table 18, the mean score of physical wellbeing of children of their family income
level 2000 (M=169.86, SD=37.8) elementary school children is higher than that of their family
income 500 (M=156.9, SD=31.2) 1000 (M=161.53, SD=37.46) and 1500 level (M=157.42,
SD=33.89).
Table 19
Family income difference in physical wellbeing (N=220)
Between group 8984.897 3 4552.226 4.76 .52
within group 299872.879 116 1043.131
Total 363987.984 219

significant difference in physical wellbeing (F=4.76, df =219, p<0.52) among elementary school
children who differ in their family income level. Hence, family income level can be considered
as one of the determinant factors of elementary children level of physical wellbeing.

Chapter Five
Discussion
This section of the study aims at discussing the major findings of the current study in line with
previous research findings reviewed in the literature.
5.1. Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Participant
5.1.1. Psychological Wellbeing
The present study result shows that 54% 0f the children of the study site have lower
psychological wellbeing. This implies that the majority of children in Repi primary school have
lower psychological wellbeing. The findings of the present study are consistent with the findings
of other studies conducted on the psychological wellbeing of elementary school children. For
example, Zhao, Banet, Lin, Fang and Zhao (2011) conducted a study on children psychological
wellbeing using a sample of 1625 children aged 6 to 18 years, in China. Their finding revealed
that elementary school children showed lower psychological wellbeing than comparison groups.
5.1.2. Physical wellbeing
The results of the study show that 51.9% of children have lower psychological wellbeing.
According to a research conducted in US America (Cabinet Office Social Exclusion Task Force,
2007), children’s in elementary school have low physical wellbeing compare to children in high
schools.
5.2. Age difference in psychological and physical wellbeing
The finding of this study somehow relates with the findings of Solomon (2008) who examined
the degree to which children demonstrate resilience stated that there was statistical significant
relationship between the children’s ages and the emotional symptom categories. The present
study show that age was significant determinant of both for psychological and physical
wellbeing. Younger children are more of ten registered scores in the normal range compared to
their older counterparts who were found to record more symptoms that are abnormal. In other
word, the behavioral reaction of an orphaned child is associated with their age. The finding
further explained that when children move from the 11-13 age group to the 14-16 age group,
their emotional symptoms increases. Another study by Compas et al. (2001) who compared
children and adults, argued that although children and adults are exposed to many of the same
stressors, their perceptions, poor physical health status and appraisal of these stressors differ
significantly, and differences exist among children of different ages. The explanation for this
finding is that, children of different age from 9 to 12 all complained about the presence of
different stressors and poor health condition differently.
5.3. Gender difference in psychological and physical wellbeing
Gender was not significantly determinant factor for both psychological and physical wellbeing.
This finding is supported by other researchers such as Zhao et al. (2011) who fund no significant
differences with regard to gender and age of children. This shows that psychological wellbeing
has no relationship with gender which is consistent with the findings of the present study.
Whereas the finding of the present study is inconsistence with the study of Solomon (2008) who
examined the degree to which children orphaned by AIDS demonstrate resilience, reported
statistically significant difference on emotional symptoms of male and female AIDS orphans.
The study stated that male children registered lower (normal) emotional symptoms than their
female counterparts.
According to Majeed et al. (2014) females are significantly differ in dependency compared to
males. Similarly, they also are significantly different in emotional instability than their
counterpart and regarding the negative worldview, males have more negative worldview than
female.
On the contrary to the present findings, He and Ji (2007) reported gender differences in
psychological wellbeing and life quality of children. Their study involved male 93 children and
93 females using standardized instruments of depression, self-esteem, and subjective life quality
were employed. It was found that boys were more vulnerable than girls in psychological
wellbeing and life quality.
Another study by Dekker, (2007) shows that during childhood, the prevalence of psychiatric
disorders is significantly higher in boys, while in adulthood, women have twice the risk of
depression compared to men. In Africa gender plays an important role in the socio-cultural set up
of families and societies. Parenting practices, socialization, roles and expectations differ
according to the sex of the child. This makes investigation into gender difference among children
on psychological wellbeing critical (Dahlback, 2008).
Furthermore, the study of Nyamukapa etal. (2010) also revealed that girls reported more
psychological distress than boys.
5.4. Mothers Educational Background difference on Psychological wellbeing
Regarding mothers educational background maternal education has effect on children
psychological wellbeing. The study result shows that Mother’s educational background has
significantly affect children physical wellbeing. Previous research suggests that mother’s
education is an important determinant of the health and physical wellbeing of children. Potential
mechanisms behind this relationship are that educated mothers have better knowledge about
health care and nutrition, healthier behavior, and that they can provide safer and more sanitary
environments for their children (Behrman and Deolalikar, 1988) more educated mothers
generally have a better health status which leads to better health through biology (Wolfe and
Behrman, 1987).
5.5. Family Income difference in psychological and physical wellbeing
With regards to family income is the determinant factor to psychological wellbeing. Consistent
with the present study, Compared with non-poor children, poor children in the United States
experience diminished psychological health as measured by a number of indicators of health
status and outcomes. In the 1988 National Health Interview Survey, parents reported that poor
children were only two-thirds as likely to be in excellent psychological health and almost twice
as likely to be in fair or poor health as non-poor children (Duncan and Rodgers, 1988)
In line with the present study, a study conducted in 578 children in Bangladesh demographic
characteristics show high effects for wellbeing and ill-being (Youngblade & Dunn 1995; Fisher
1992), indicate that family size and parental education have high effect physical wellbeing, but
the effect of gender is much less when it comes to mental and physical well-being. Most large
surveys showed little evidence of gender differences.
Consistent with the previous research findings, family income is found to be the determinant
factor to physical wellbeing of children. Lawson and Mace (2008) use the British Avon
Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children dataset, and find that children from larger families
are unhealthy and have a lower growth rate than the comparison group. Also Hall and Hall
(2007) concluded that: ‘Poverty, poor housing and lack of social support are recurring themes in
the literature on poor physical wellbeing.

Chapter Six
Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendations
6.1. Summary
The general objective of this study is to assess the physical and psychological wellbeing of
elementary school children and to explore the relationship between psychological and physical
wellbeing of elementary school children and demographic factors such as age, gender, family
income and mother education. Quantitative method was employed to answer the stated research
questions.
To analyze the data obtained from psychological wellbeing scale was analyzed using mean split,
percentage, independent t-test and one way ANOVA to compare mean difference between males
and females, age groups, mother’s educational level and family income, and to their
psychological wellbeing.
The following major findings were found from the analysis of the quantitative data:
Using mean split technique on the psychological wellbeing scores of, childern120 (54.5%) of
the children had low psychological wellbeing whereas only 100(45.5%) of them had high
wellbeing. And on physical wellbeing scores of the children 113 (51.4%) of children had low
physical wellbeing and 107(48.6%) of them had high physical wellbeing.
The result from t- test suggests that gender does not have any effect on elementary school
children’s psychological and physical wellbeing. The result suggests that age has effect on
elementary school children’s psychological and physical wellbeing.

The computed one way ANOVA shows that there is statistically significant difference in
psychological wellbeing (F=4.211, df =219, p<0.05) among elementary school children who
differ in their mothers educational level. Hence, maternal education can be considered as one of
the determinant factors of elementary children level of psychological wellbeing. Also the
computed one way ANOVA indicated that there is statistically significant difference in
psychological wellbeing (F=6.89, df =219, p<0.05) among elementary school children who differ
in their family income level. Hence, family income level can be considered as one of the
determinant factors of elementary children level of psychological wellbeing.
6.2. Conclusions
Based on the major findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:
The majority of the children scored low on psychological wellbeing also most of the children
score low Physical wellbeing this implies that children in the school have low psychological and
physical wellbeing.
Gender does not have any effect on elementary school children’s psychological wellbeing
whereas age has effect on elementary school children’s psychological wellbeing.
Mothers’ educational background has statistically significant difference on children on
psychological wellbeing. Hence, mother’s educational background and age have impact on their
both on psychological and physical wellbeing.
Family income level is one of the determinant factors of elementary children level of
psychological wellbeing also family income level is the determinant factors of elementary
children level of psychological wellbeing.

6.3 Recommendations
Based on these major findings of the study, the following are recommended:
As the researcher observed during the research process, there are no psychological services in
this selected primary school. Children need special child guidance and counseling programs.
This is a specialized service which demands adequate training on the part of the counselors. It is
therefore recommend that the schools may have to consider the possibility of recruiting a
qualified school counselors or child psychologist. The task here is to offer early warning of
psychological conditions that may prevent a child from benefiting from school services; and to
offer referral services for the cases the professionals in the schools are not able to handle. The
psychologist so employed will have the skills to diagnose psycho-social problems and to offer
psychological service to children in need.
Counseling and Child Psychology should be taught to teachers and health care providers and all
schools will need to have a child guidance counselor to help not only children but also their
caretakers and the teachers in dealing with the children.
Psychological care should be of equal importance in the care of children as that of other needs
such as providing food. Community development workers and guardians need to understand
signs of emotional problems and should provide love and care for the children. A great amount
of time, love and care must be given to the children. Hence, periodic workshops and seminars
should be organized for guardians and community development workers to train them in problem
identification and psychological service.
Teachers and parents should encourage children’s autonomy providing care and support to
enhance the psychological wellbeing of children.

School environment must confortable for all children. Government and other concerned body
should consider the safety of sanitation, water and play areas when building school equality
important to the class room and learning materials s to protect the physical wellbeing and safety
of children.
Poor and uneducated families should be helped in terms of food security, health facilities,
income generation and counseling including information on the Rights of the Child, so as to be
able to better look after their children.
Finally, there is also a need for future in-depth qualitative and experimental studies to gain
detailed and rich understanding in answering the “how” and “why” of the behaviors and
experiences of children in the real world. Moreover, there is a need for more research to
delineate the specific psychological and other problems faced by the caretakers of children.
Reference
Afework Tsegaye. (2013). A comparative study of psychological wellbeing between orphan and
non-orphan children in Addis Ababa: The Case of Three Selected Schools in Yeka Sub-
city.
Atwine, B., Cantor, E., & Banjunirwe, F. (2005). Psychological distress among AIDS orphans in
rural Uganda.Social Science & Medicine.61(2), 555–564.
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., & Watson, M. S. (1997). Caring school communities. Educational
Psychologist, 32, 137-151.
Bailey. D. B., & Wolery, M. (1992). Teaching infants and preschoolers with disabilities: An
introduction to early learning (2nd ed.). New York: Merrill.
Becky, F., & Merissa, T. (2009). Young children’s wellbeing: Domains and context of
development from birth to age 8 (3rd ed.). New York: Random House.
Beckett, L. (2000). Education, health and welfare: issues for social justice. Australian
Educational Research, 27(3), 131-142.
Beckett, M., & Pebley, A. R. (2002). Ethnicity, Language and Economic. Well-Being in Rural
Guatemala: RAND.
Behrman, J., & Deolalikar, A. (1988). Health and Nutrition. In Hollis Chenery and T.N.
Srinivasan (Eds.). Handbook of Development Economics, Volume 1, Amsterdam: North
Holland.
Ben-Arieh, A. (2006). Measuring and monitoring the well-being of young children around the
world. Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2007, Strong
foundations: early childhood care and education, UNESCO, Geneva.

Ben-Arieh, A., & R. George. (2001). “Beyond the Numbers: How Do We Monitor the State of
Our Children”, Children and Youth Services Review, 23 (2), 709-727.
Ben-Arieh, A., & I., Frønes. (2007a). “Indicators of Children’s Wellbeing: What should be
measured and Why?” Social Indicators Research, 84, 249-250.
Bennett J., (2011). Introduction: Early Childhood Education and Care. Encyclopedia on Early
Childhood Development. retrieved from
www.chilencyclopedia.com/pages/PDF/BennettANGxp1-Intro.pdf.
Blanksby, B. A., & Whipp, P. (2004). Healthy mind in a healthy body: engaging young people in
physical activity through school health and physical education, College year book.
Australian College of Educators.
Bornstein, M. H., Davidson, L., Keyes, C. L. M., & Moore, K. A. (2003). Well-Being Positive
Development: Across the Life Course. Mahwah. Lawrence: Erlbaum Associates.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Interacting systems in human development. Research paradigms:
Present and future. (1st ed.). 67-93. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Brown B., & Corbett, T. (1997). Social indicators and public policy in the age of devolution:
IRP Special Report Series. Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.
Cabinet Office Social Exclusion Task Force. (2007) Reaching Out: Think Family. ( London
publication No. COETF 78-890). Cabinet Office, London.
Campbell, D.T. (1981). Another perspective on a scholarly career: Scientific inquiry and the
social sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Canfield, L., Streuli, N., & Woodhead, M. (2008). Child wellbeing in context of poverty:
approach to research, monitoring and participation: young live technical note No 12.
CSA, (2009). Ethiopian Central Statistics Agency, Addis Ababa: Retrieved October 16, 2016,
from www.csa.gov.et
Casas, F. (1997). Children’s Rights and Children’s Quality of Life: Conceptual and Practical
Issues, Social Indicators Research, 42, 283-298. doi 10.1235450009X.8768
Crosnoe, R., Monica, K., & Glen, H. (2004). School size and the interpersonal side of education:
an examination of race/ethnicity and organizational context. Social sciences quarterly,
85(5), 1259-1274.
Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H., Thomsen A. H., & Wadsworth, M. E.
(2001).Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: problems, progress, and
potential in theory and research, Psychological Bulletin,127(8), 87-127.
Currie, J., and E. Tekin. (2006). “Does Child Abuse Cause Crime?” NBER Working Paper No.
12171, April.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, Eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 1-11.
Dahlback, B. (2008). Early days of APC resistance and FV Leiden. Hamostaseologie 28,103-10
Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D., & Snijders, T.A.B. (2007). Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to
collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika 72, 563-581.
Duncan, G., and Roders, J., (2000). Family Poverty, Welfare Reform, and Child Development:
Child Development 71 (1), 188-196.
Duncan, G.J., & Rodgers, W.L. (1988). Longitudinal aspects of childhood poverty. Journal of
Marriage and the Family 50 (4): 1007–21.

Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2000). Well-being as a psychological indicator of health in old age: A
research agenda. Studies Psychology, 42, 61-70
Erikson, E.H., (1963). Children and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
Fabian Society. (2006). Narrowing the Gap. Fabian Commission on Life Chances and Child
Poverty. (3rd ed.). London. Fabian Society.
Fattore, T., Mason, J., & Watson, E. (2007). Children’s conceptualizations of their well-being.
Health Psychology Journal: practice and research, 56 (3), 567-575
Fisher, Edward P. (1992). The Impact of Play on Development: A Meta-Analysis. Play and
Culture. Social Indicators Research, 80(1), 5-29. doi:23,1073/jado.1987.0657
Girum Tareke. (2012). Psychological Wellbeing as a Function of Religious Involvement,
Spirituality and Personal Meaning in Life among Community-Residing Elders in
Dessie Town.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale
development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79-90.
Grainger S., & Robinson, A. (2004). Housing and Health in Scotland: Analysis of the 2002
Scottish House Condition Survey. (Report no. CSE-HS67-8). Communities Scotland,
Edinburgh.
Gutman, L.M., & Feinstein, L. (2008). Determinants of Aspirations. London: Centre for the
Wider Benefits of Learning, Institute of Education.
Hall, D., & Elliman, D. (2006). Health for All Children, revised (4th ed.). Oxford ,Oxford
University Press.
Hall, D., & Hall, S. (2007). The Family Nurse Partnership: developing an instrument for
identification, assessment and recruitment of clients. London.

Harker, L. (2006). Chance of a Lifetime: The impact of bad housing on children’s lives, Shelter,
London.
He, Z., & Ji, C. (2007). Nutritional status, psychological well-being and the quality of life of
AIDS orphans in rural Henan Province, China. Trop Med International Health, 12, 1180-
1190.
Higgins, A., Powe, C., & Kohlbers, L. (1984). The relationship of moral atmosphere to
judgments of responsibility. In W.M. Kurtines, & Gewirtz, J.L. (Ed.). Morality, moral
behavior, and moral development 74-80). New York: Wiley.
Hood, S. (2007). Reporting on Children’s Well-being: The State of London’s Children Reports,
Social Indicators Research, 80, 1249-1264
Huck, W. (2004). Reading statistics and research. (4th ed.). USA: Pearson education Inc.
Huppert, F.A. (2005). Positive mental health in individuals and populations. In F.A.
Huppert, B. Keverne and N. Baylis (Eds.). The Science of Well-being, 307-340. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Huppert, F. A. (2009). A new approach to reducing disorder and improving well-being: In E.
Diener. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 108-111.
IRC. (2005). Notes and news (online). International Water and Sanitation Centre: Netherlands.
From: http:/www.irc. Org/nl/page/2282pdf.
Jeffris, B., Power, C., & Hertzman, C. (2002). Birth weight, childhood socio-economic
environment, and cognitive development in the 1958 British birth cohort study, British
Medical Journal, 325: 305-310.
Kickbusch, I. (2011). Learning for Well-being: a policy priority for children and youth in
Europe: consultation document, Learning for Well-being, Consortium of Foundations in
Europe, from
www.eiesp.org/site/pages/view/77-learning-for-well-being-a-policy-priority-for
children-and young-people-in-europe.html
Lawson, D. W., & Mace, R. (2008). Sibling configuration and childhood growth in
contemporary families. International Journal of Epidemiology, 37, 1408-21.
Luepker, R. V., Perry, C. L., McKinlay, S. M., Nader, P. R., Parcel, G. S., & Stone, E. J. (1996).
Outcomeses of field trial to improve children's dietary patterns and physical activity: The
Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health. CATCH collaborative group.
Journal of the American Medical Association, 275, 768-776.
Maantay, M. (2003). Zoning Equity and Public Health. In Hofrichter, R. (ed.) Health and Social
Justice: Politics, Ideology and Inequity in the Distribution of Disease, San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.
Maslow, A. H. (1999). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
Mick, Z. (2011). South Carolina School Environment Initiative: South Carolina Department of
Education, Columbia. Retrieved on March 21, 2016, frohttp://ed.sc.gov/agency/ac/
Student-Intervention-Services/documents/SC-SchoolEnvironmentRFP-Nov2011.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2010). National Policy Framework for Early Childhood Care and
Education. Addis Ababa: Government of Ethiopia.
Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health and Ministry of Women’s Affairs. (2010). Strategic
operational plan and guideline for early childhood care and education (ECCE) in
Ethiopia, Addis Ababa: Ultimate Printing Press.

Morrow, V. & Mayall, B. (2009) ‘What is wrong with children’s well-being in the UK?
Questions of meaning and measurement’: Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law,
31(3), 217-229
OPHI, (2007). Psychological and subjective wellbeing: a proposal for internationally comparable
indicators: oxford development studies publisher.
Okun MA., Stock, W.A., Haring M.J., Witter, R.A. (1984). The social activity/subjective well-
being relation: a quantitative synthesis. Res. Aging 6:45–65.
Patchett, E. (2010). The curse: the impact of sanitation on schoolgirls in the developing world
(online).
The Guardian. from http://www.guardian.co.uk/journalismcompetition/sanitation-schoolgirls-in-
the-developing-world?INTCMP=SRCH (accessed 30 May 2011).
Pantazis, C. (2004). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain the millennium survey. The Policy
Press, Bristol.
Perez, W. (2012). Gender Difference in Psychological Wellbeing among Filipino college
student samples. International journal of humanities and social science, 2, 84-93
Pollard, E. L. and Lee, P. D. (2003). ‘Child Well-being: A Systematic Review of the Literature’.
Social Indicators Research, 61(1), 59-78.
Rees, G., Bradshaw, J., Goswami, H., & Keung, A. (2010a). Understanding Children's Well-
being: A national survey of young people's well-being. The Children’s Society, London.
Rickwood D, Boyle R, Spears B. and Scott C. (2002). The expanding school agenda: Directions
in Education.
Rutter, M. (1984). Resilient Children. Why some disadvantaged children over-come their
environments and how we can help, Psychology Today, 57-65.

Ryan, R. M. & Edward L, Deci. (2001). "On Happiness and Human Potential: a Review of
Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being." Annual Review of Psychology
52,141-66.
Ryan, RM., Frederick, CM. (1997). On energy, personality and health: subjective vitality as a
dynamic reflection of well-being. J. Pers.65:529–65
Ryff, C.D., (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological wellbeing: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069-1081
Ryff, C.D. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. (1995). "The Structure of Psychological Well-Being Revisited."
Journal Personality and social Psychology 69, 719-27.
Ryff, C. D., Lee, Y. H., Essex, M. J., & Schmutte, P. S. (1994). My children and me: Midlife
evaluations of grown children and self. Psychology and Aging, 9, 195-205.
Ryff, C.D., & Singer, B. H, (1998). The contours of positive human health. Psychological
Inquiry, 9, 1–28.
Ryff, CD., Singer, B. (2000). Interpersonal flour-ishing: a positive health agenda for the new
millennium. Pers. Social .Psychol. Rev. 4:30–44
Santrock, J.W. (2001). Child development. Boston: McGraw-Hill p. (pp. 47).
Santrock, J.W. (2006). Life span development (10th ed.). Baston: McGraw-Hill.
Srimathi, N. L., & Kiran Kumar, S. K. (2010), Psychological Wellbeing of Employed Women
across Different Organizations: Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology.

Strunk, D. R., Lopez, H., & DeRubeis, R. J. (2006). Depressive symptoms are associated with
unrealistic negative predictions of future life events. Behaviour Research and Therapy,
44, 875-896.
Solomon Worku (2008).Resilience among children exposed to traumatic loss: A study of
children orphaned by AIDS in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. University of Oslo.MA thesis.
Retrieved from https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/18460/solomon agaje.pdf
Tassew, Woldehanna. (2011).Understanding changes in the lives of poor children: Initial
findings from Ethiopia. Oxford: Young Lives Round 3 Survey Report.
www.young.org.uk.
Tassew,Woldehanna, & Leyusew Geberemedhin. (2012). The effect of preschool attendance on
cognitive development of urban children age 5 and 8. From
www.young.org.uk.
Tsegai Mulugeta. (2015). early child care and education attainment in Ethiopia: status and
current challenges.
UNASCO. (2007). early childhood briefing paper: All children ready for school health and
physical wellbeing. New York
Vander Zanden, J.W. (2007), Human Development. (8th ed.). Boston McGraw-Hill.
WASH. (2011). WASH in Schools. From www.washinschools.info/ (accessed 1 May 201).
Waterman, Schwartz., & Conti. (2008). The implications of two conceptions of happiness
(hedonic enjoyment and eudaimonia) for the understanding of intrinsic motivation.
Journal of happiness, 9, 41-79
Whitener, L.M., Cox, K.R., & Maglich, S.A. (1998) use of theory to guide nurse in the design of
health massage of children. Advance in nursing science, 20(3), 21-35

Wilder, E. (2003). "The theoretical basis for the life model, Appendix B: Research and resources
on human development". The Complete Guide to Living with Men (PDF): ISBN 978-0-
9674357-5-6, Retrieved 2016-01-28.
Wolery, M. (2004). Assessing children’s environments. In McLean M, Wolery and D.B. Bailey
Jr. (Eds.), Assessing infants and preschoolers with special needs (pp. 204-235). Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.
Wolfe, B., & Behrman, J. (1987). Women’s schooling and children’s health: are the effects
robust with adult sibling control for the women’s childhood background? Journal of
Health Economics, 6, 239-254.
World Health Organization. (1948). Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health
Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization.
World Health Organization. (2001).The world health report-mental health: New understanding,
new hope. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Woodhead, M. (2009). Pathways through early childhood education in Ethiopia, India and
Peru: Rights, diversity and equity, Working Paper 54, Oxford: Young Lives.
Woodhead, M., Ames P., Vennam, U., Abebe, W., & Streuli, N. (2012): Equity and quality?
Challenges for early childhood and primary education in Ethiopia, India, and Peru,
Working Paper 59: Studies in Early Childhood Transitions, The Hague: Bernard van
Leer Foundation.
Www. Liberal arts wabash.edu: Center of inquiry in the liberal arts at Wabash College.
www.young lives. Org UK.OECD (2005). Glossary of statistical terms (online).
http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=6326 (accessed 30 May 2011).

Youngblade,Lise M., and Judy Dunn. (1995). “Individual Differences in Young Children’s
Pretend Play with Mother and Sibling: Links to Relationships and Understanding of
Other People’s Feelings and Beliefs.” Child Development 66:1472–92.36, 89-95.
Zhao, J., Li, X., Barnett, D., Lin, X., Fang, X., & Zhao, G. (2011). Parental loss, trusting
relationship with current caregivers, and psychosocial adjustment among children
affected by AIDS in China. Psychology Health Med.; 16, 437–49.

Appendices
Appendix-A Demographic data questioner and Ryff’s psychological wellbeing scale
physical wellbeing scale (English version)
School of psychology
The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information regarding to psychological and
physical wellbeing of children in elementary school. This questionnaire has three parts: the first
part has demographic questions about the respondents; the second part has Ryff’s Scale of
Psychological Wellbeing, the third part questions about physical wellbeing scale. The
information you provide has a very important input in the direction and completion of this study,
so please try to be honest, and careful. There is no one to judge you because there is not right or
wrong answer for the questions.
The information will be kept confidential and be only applied for the study. Yours right
information helps to reach the goals of the study.
Thank you for investing your time and honesty completing this questionnaire.
Part one፡ Background Information
Direction: please indicate your answer by making (√) in the box that corresponds to your answer
or to write the cor
1.
2. Age ______________________________________
3. Grade level _________________________________

4. Family size _______________________________
5. Family income per month
A)
B)
C)
D)
6. Educational background of Mather
A) Illiterate
B) Elementary level
C) Secondary level
D) Tertiary level
Part two
RYFF SCALES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING
The following set of statements deals with how you might feel about yourself and your life.
Please remember that there are neither rights nor wrong answers.
Put √ mark that best describes the degree to which you agree or disagree with each
statement
No. Put √ mark that best Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Strongly
describes the degree to which Disagree Slightly Slightly Agree
you agree or disagree with
1 Most people see me as loving
and affectionate.
2 I am not afraid to voice my

opinion, even when they are in
opposition to the opinions of
most people.
3 In general, I feel I am in
charge of the situation in
which I live.
4 When I look at the story of my
life, I am pleased with how
things have turned out.
5 Maintaining close relationships
has been difficulty and
frustrating for me.
6 My decisions are not usually
influenced by what everyone
else is doing
7 The demands of everyday life
often get me down
8 In general, I feel confident and
positive about myself
9 I often feel lonely because I

have few close friends with
whom to share my concerns
10 I tend to worry about what
other people think of me
11 I do not fit very well with the
people and the community
around me.
12 I think it is important to have

new experiences that challenge

how you think about yourself
and the world
13 My daily activities often seem
trivial and unimportant to me.
14 I feel like many of the people
I know have gotten more out
of life than I have.
15 I enjoy personal and mutual
conversations with family
members or friends
16 Being happy with myself is
more important to me than
having others approve of me.
17 I am quite good at managing
the many responsibilities of
my daily life
18 When I think about it, I
haven’t really improved much
as a person over the years
19 I don’t have a good sense of
what it is I’m trying to
accomplish in my life
20 I like most aspects of my
personality
21 I don’t have many people who
want to listen when I need to
talk
22 I tend to be influenced by
people with strong opinions
23 I often feel overwhelmed by

my Responsibilities
24 I have a sense that I have
developed a lot as a person
over time.
25 I used to set goals for myself,
but that now seems a waste of
time.
26 I made some mistakes in the
past, but I feel that all in all
everything has worked out for
the best
27 It seems to me that most other
people have more friends than
I do.
28 I have confidence in my
opinions, even if they are
contrary to the general
consensus.
29 I generally do a good job of
taking Care of my personal
finances and affairs.
30 I do not enjoy being in new
situations that require me to
change my old familiar ways
of doing things.
31 I enjoy making plans for the
future and working to make
them a reality.
32 In many ways, I feel
disappointed about my
achievements in my life.
33 People would describe me as a
giving person, willing to share
my time with others.
34 It’s difficult for me to voice
my own opinions on
controversial matters.
35 I am good at juggling my time
so that I can fit everything in
that needs to be done.
36 For me, life has been a
continuous process of learning,
changing, and growth.
37 I am an active person in
carrying out the plans I set for
myself.
38 I have not experienced many
warm and trusting
relationships with others
39 I often change my mind about
decisions if my friends or
family disagree
40 I have difficulty arranging my
life in a way that is satisfying
to me.
41 I gave up trying to make big
improvements or change in my
life a long time ago
42 Some people wander aimlessly
through life, but I am not one
of them.
43 I know that I can trust my

friends, and they know they
can trust me.
44 I judge myself by what I think
is important, not by the values
of what others think is
important.
45 I have been able to build a
home and a lifestyle for myself
that is much to my liking
46 When I compare myself to
friends And acquaintances, it
makes me feel good about who
I am.
Part three
Physical Wellbeing Questionnaires
The following set of statements deals with how you might feel about your health.
Please remember that there are neither rights nor wrong answers.
Put √ mark that best describes the degree to which you agree or disagree with each
statement
No Questions Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Strongly

Disagree Slightly Slightly Agree
1. In general, how would you
say your health is?
2. Have you felt fit and well?
3. Have you been physically

active (e.g. running,
climbing, and biking)?
4. Have you been able to run
well?
5 Do you play in school
6. Have you felt full of
energy?
Appendix-B Demographic data questioner and Ryff’s psychological wellbeing scale and
physical wellbeing scale (Amharic version)
አዲስ አበባ ዩኒቨርሲቲ

የስነ-ትምህርት እና የስነ-ባህሪ ኮሌጅ
የሳይኮሎጂ ትምህርት ቤት
የዚህ መጠይቅ ዋና አላማ በአንደኛ ደረጃ ትምህርት ቤት ውስጥ የሚማሩ ልጆች ስነልቦናዊና
አካላዊ ደህንነት መጠንን ለመፈተሸ ይረዳ ዘንድ የተዘጋጀ መረጃ መሰብሰቢያ ነው፡፡
መጠይቁ ሶስት ዋና ዋና ክፍሎች አሉት፡፡
የመጀመሪያው ክፍል አጠቃላይ በጥናቱ ተሳታፊዋች ቤተሰብ ማህበራዊ ኢኮኖሚያዊ

መረጃን የሚመለከቱ ጥያቂዎች ይይዛል ሁለተኛው ክፍል ስነልቦናዊ ደህንነትን
በተመለከተ የቀረቡ ጥያቄዋች ሲሆኑ ሶስተኛው ክፍል የተሳታፊዎችን አካላዊ ደህንነት
በተመለከተ የቀረቡ ጥያቄዎች ናቸው፡፡ አራተኛው ክፍል ስለ ትምህርት ቤታችሁን አከባቢያዊ
ሁኔታ ዙሪያ ያሚያተኩሩ ጥያቆዎችን አካቷል፡፡ የሚሰጡት መረጃ የጥናቱን አቅጣጫ
የሚመራና ጥናቱን ለማጠናቀቅ የሚረዳ ስለሆነ በጥናቱ ውስጥ ትልቅ ግብአት መሆኑን
ተገንዝበው በጥንቃቄና በታማኝነት እንድዘበትሞላ/እንድትሞይ በትህትና እጠይቃለሁ፡፡
በምትሰጡት መልስ ይዘት የማትገመገሙ መሆኑን የማረጋግጥላችሁ ሲሆን

የአንተን/ቺን መረጃ ሚስጥራዊነት ለመጠበቅ ያስችል ዘንድ ስምህን/ሽን እና
አድራሻህን/ሽን መጥቀስ አያስፈልግም፡፡ መረጃው ለጥናቱ አላማ ብቻ የሚውል መሆኑን
በተጨማሪም የምትሰጡት መረጃ ሚስጥራዊ እና ማን እንደሞላው ሊታወቅ የሚችልባቸው
ሁኔታዎች አለመኖራቸውን ለምሳሌ፡- ስም፡ የሚማሩበት ት/ቤት አለመጠቀሱን ልገልፅ
እወዳለው፡፡
ይህን መጠይቅ በመሙላት ለምትሰጡኝ መረጃና ለምታደርጉልኝ ትብብር በቅድሚያ ከልብ

አመሠግናለሁ!!
ክፍል አንድ ጠቅላላ መረጃ
መመሪያ፡- መልሣችሁን በሣጥን ምልክቱ ውስጥ የ (√) ምልክት የሰቀምጡ በተጨማሪም ባዶ
መሰመር በሚያገኙበት ቦታዎች ላይ መልሶትን ይፃፉ፡፡

1. ፆታ ሀ) ሴት ለ) ወንድ
2. እድሜ ________________________________________________
3. ስንተኛ ክፍል ነህ/ነሽ _________________________________________
4. የቤተሰብ ብዛት _________________________________________________
5. የቤተሰብ ወርሐዊ ገቢ
ሀ) ከ 500 እስከ 1000
ለ) 1000 እስከ 1500
ሐ) 1500 እስከ 2000
መ) 2000 እስከ 3000እና ከዚያ በላይ
ሠ) ከ500 ብር በታች
6. የእናት ትምህርት ሁኔታ
ሀ) ምንም ያልተማረ
ሐ) የመጀመሪያ ደረጃ ትምህርት
መ) ሁለተኛ ደረጃ ትምህርት
ሠ) ሶስተኛ ደረጃ
ክፍል ሁለት
የሚከተሉት አረፍተ ነገሮች እናንተ ስለራሳችሁ እና ስለ ህይወታችሁ የሚሰማችሁ
ስሜት ላይ ሲያውጠነጥኑ ለየትኛውም ጥያቄ ትክክል ወይም ትክክል ያልሆነ መልስ
አለመኖሩን ተገንዝባችሁ የሚከተሉትን ዐ/ነገሮች በምን ያህል መጠን መስማማታችሁን
ወይም አለመስማማታችሁን ይህን √ ምልክት በማስቀመጥ ይግለፁ፡
ተ. አረፍተ ነገር በጣም አልስማማም በመጠኑ በመጠኑ እስማማለሁ በጣማ

ቁ እልስማማም አልስማማም እስማማለሁ እስማማለሁ
1 ብዙ ሰዎች እኔን ሰው
ወዳጅና አዛኝ አድርገው
ያዩኛል.
2 ምንም እንኳን የኔ ሃሳብ
ከሌሎች ሰዎችጋር
ተቃራኒ ቢሆንም ሃሳቤን
ለመግለፅ ፍራቻ የለብኝም
3 በአጠቃላይ በህይወቴ
ውስጥ ያሉ
ሁኔታዎች/ነገሮች በእኔ
ቁጥጥር ስር እንዳሉ
ይሰማኛል
4 የኋላ ታሪኬን በማይበት

ጊዜ ባሳለፍኳቸው ነገሮች
ሁሉ ደስተኛ ነኝ ነገሮች
5 ከሰዎች ጋር ያለኝን ቅርብ
ግንኙነትን ጠብቆ ማቆየት
ለኔ ከባድና ፈታኝ ነው
6 አብዛኛውን ጊዜ ሌሎች
ሰዎች የሚያደርጉት
ድርጊት በኔ ውሳኔ ላይ
ተጽእኖ አይፈጥርም
7 ለመኖር የሚያስፈልገኝን
ነገሮች ማሟላት ብዙ ጊዜ
ፈታኝ/ አስቸጋሪ ሆኖ
አገኘዋለሁ
8 በአጠቃላይ በራስ
መተማመን እና ስለራሴ
አዎንታዊ አመለካከት
እንዳለኝ ይሰማኛል
9 ሃሳቤን የማጋራቸው
የቅርብ ጎደኞቼ ቁጥር
ውስን በመሆናቸው ብዙ
ጊዜ የብቸኝነት ስሜት
ይሰማኛል
10 ሰዎች ስለኔ ምን ያስባሉ

የሚለው ነገር
ያስጨንቀኛል
11 በዙሪያዬ ካሉ ሰዎችና
ማህበረሰብ ጋር በጥሩ
ሁኔታ የምግባባ
አይመስለኝም
12 ስለ ራሴም ሆነ ስለአለም
ያለኝን አመለካከት
በአዳዲስ ልምዶች
መፈተን ተገቢ ነው ብዬ
አስባለሁ
13 የዕለት ተለት
እንቅስቃሴዎቼ ፍሬ
የለሽ እና እርባና ቢስ
መስለው ይሰሙኛል
14 በአብዛኛው የማውቃቸው
ሰዎች ከኔ በተሻለ ኑሮ
የተሳካላቸው ይመስለኛል
15 ከቤተሰቦቼ እና ከጎደኞቼ
ጋር በግልና በጋራ
ጉዳዮች ላይ ግልፅ
ውይይት ማድረግ
ያስደስተኛል
16 በሌሎች ሰዎች
ተቀባይነት ከማግኘት
ይልቅ በራሴ ደስተኛ
ስለመሆኔ የተሻለ ቦታ
እሰጠዋለሁ
17 በእለት ህይወቴ ያሉብኝን

ሃላፊነቶች
በመወጣት ረገድ ጎበዝነኝ
18 ቆም ብዬ ሳስበው
ያለፈውን የህይወት
ዘመኔን የባከነ መስሎ
ይሰማኛል
19 በህይወቴ ማከናወን
ስላለብኝ ነገር በቂ ግንዛቤ
አለኝ ብዬ አላስብም
20 አብዛኛውን ስብዕናዬን
እወደዋለው
21 መናገር በምፈልግበት ጊዜ
ብዙ አድማጭ የለኝም
22 ጠንካራ አመለካከት
ያላቸው ሰዎች
በቀላሉ ተፅዕኖ
ያሳድሩብኛል
23 ብዙ ጊዜ በሃላፊነቴ ላይ
የመሰላቸት ስሜት
ይሰማኛል
24 እንደግለሰብ በጊዜ ሂደት
ብዙ ለውጦች በራሴ ላይ
የተከሰቱ ይመስለኛል
25 ቀደም ሲል ማሳካት
የምፈልጋቸውን
ግቦች አስቀምጥ ነበር
አሁን ግን ጊዜ ማባከን
መስሎ ይሰማኛል
26 በህይወቴ አንዳንድ
ስህተቶችን ብፈጽምም
ነገሮች ሁሉ
በስተመጨረሻ መልካም
እንደሆኑ ይሰማኛል
27 ብዙ ሰዎች ከኔ በተሻለ
ብዙ ጓደኞች
እንዳላቸው ይሰማኛል
28 ሰዎች የሚስማሙበት
ባይሆንም በራሴ
አቋም/አስተሳሰብ ሙሉ
እምነት አለኝ
29 የግል ጉዳዮቼን እና
ገንዘቤን በማስተዳደር
በኩል ጎበዝ ነኝ
30 ቀደም ብዬ ድርጊቶችን
መፈጸም የለመድኩበትን
መንገድ የሚያስቀይረኝ
አዲስ ሁኔታ ውስጥ
መግባት አያስደስተኝም
31 ማቀድና እቅዴን እውን

ለማድረግ መጣር
ያስደስተኛል
32 በህይወቴ ያገኘሁዋቸው
ውጤቶች በብዙ መልኩ
ለኔ ከበቂ በታች ናቸው
33 ሰዎች ጊዜዬን ለማካፈል
ፈቃደኛ የሆንኩ ደግ
ሰው አድርገው
ይገልፁኛል
34 አከራካሪ በሆኑ ጉዳዮች
ላይ የራሴን ሃሳብ
መግለጽ ይከብደኛል
35 ማከናወን የሚገቡኝን
ድርጊቶች ለማከናወን
ጊዜዬን በአግባቡ ከፋፍዬ
በደንብ መጠቀም
እችላለሁ
36 ህይወት ለኔ ቀጣይነት
ያለው የመማር፣
የመለወጥና የማደግ
ሂደት ነው
37 ለእራሴ ያወጣሁትን
እቅድ ተግባራዊ
በማድረግ በጣም
የተዋጣልኝ ሰው ነኝ
38 ከሌሎች ጋር ብዙም
አስደሳችና እምነት
የሚጣልበት አይነት
ግንኙነት ኖሮኝ አያውቅም
39 ጎደኞቼና ቤተሰቦቼ በኔ
ሃሳብ ውሳኔ ካልተስማሙ
ብዙ ጊዜ ሃሳቤን ቶሎ
እቀይራለሁ
40 ህይወቴን በሚያረካኝ
መልኩ ማስተካከል ከባድ
ይሆንብኛል
41 በህወቴ ውስጥ መሻሻልን

ለማምጣት መሞከር
ካቆምኩ ብዙ ቆይቻለሁ
42 ብዙ ሰዎች ያለዓላማ
የሚኖሩ ቢኖሩም እኔ
ግን ከነሱ ውስጥ
አልመደብም
43 እኔ ጎደኞቼን ማመን
እንዳለብኝ አውቃለሁ
እንዲሁም ጎደኞቼም እኔን
እንደሚያምኑኝ
አውቃለሁ
44 ራሴን የምገመግመው ለኔ
በሚመስለኝ መለኪያ
እንጂ ሌሎች
ባስቀመጡልኝ መለኪያ
አይደለም
45 ለኔ የሚመችና
የሚስማማ የኑሮ ዘይቤ
መመስረት ችያለሁ
46 እራሴን ከጓደኞቼና
ከማውቃቸው ሰዎች ጋር
ሳነፃፅር በማንነቴ ደስ
ይለኛል
ክፍል ሶስት
አካላዊ ደህንነት
የሚከተሉት አረፍተ ነገሮች እናንተ ስለራሳችሁ እና ስለ ጤንነታቹ የሚሰማችሁ ስሜት ላይ
ሲያውጠነጥኑ ለየትኛውም ጥያቄ ትክክል ወይም ትክክል ያልሆነ መልስ አለመኖሩን
ተገንዝባችሁ የሚከተሉትን ዐ/ነገሮች በምን ያህል መጠን መስማማታችሁን ወይም
አለመስማማታችሁን ይህን √ ምልክት በማስቀመጥ ይግለፁ፡፡
ተ.ቁ መጠይቅ በጣም አልስማማም በመጠኑ በመጠኑ እስማማለሁ በጣማ

እልስማማም አልስማማም እስማማለሁ እስማማለሁ
1. ጤናማና ጠንካራ ነኝ
ብለህ ታስባለህ
2. ደንነትና ጤናማነት
ይሰማሐል
3. ቀልጣፋ ነህ (መሮጥ፣
መጫወት፣መዝለል)
4. በደንብ መሮጥ
ትችላለህ/ትችያለሽ
5. ትምህርት ቤት ውስጥ
ትጫወታለህ/ሽ
6. ጥንካሬና ሐይል
ይሰማሐል/ሻል

Betelehem Bekele

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Betelehem Bekele

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Betelehem Bekele

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WELLBEING OF CHILDREN

Addis Ababa University

College of Education and Behavioral Studies

Determinants of Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Elementary School

Children In the case of Repi Primary School

Determinants of Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Elementary School

Children In the case of Repi Primary School

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Psychology Addis Ababa University in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of

Arts in Social Psychology

Addis Ababa University

College of Education and Behavioral Studies

Determinants of Psychological and Physical Wellbeing of Elementary School

Children In the case of Repi Primary School

Approval of the Board of Examiners

Name: ___________________________Signature: ____________Date:_____________

Name: ___________________________Signature: ____________Date:_____________

Name: ___________________________Signature: ______________Date:_____________

revealed a significant mean difference only between mothers’ educational background in

protect the physical wellbeing and safety of children.

could not have come to completion.

course of my thesis work.

to express my gratified to study participants for providing me with important information.

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ .iii

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................v

List of Tables ...............................................................................................................................viii

Chapter One ............................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Background of the Study ........................................................................................................ 11

1.2. Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................................... 14

1.3. Research question .................................................................................................................. 16

1.4. Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................................... 16

1.5. Significance of the Study........................................................................................................ 17

1.6. Scope of the Study ................................................................................................................. 18

1.7. Operational Definition of Terms ............................................................................................. 18

Chapter Two ......................................................................................................................................... 19

Review of Related Literature ................................................................................................................. 19

2.1. Overview of Wellbeing .......................................................................................................... 19

2.2. Theories of Wellbeing ............................................................................................................ 20

2.3. Wellbeing of Children ............................................................................................................ 21

2.4. Factors that Contribute to Wellbeing of Children .................................................................... 23

2.5. Psychological Wellbeing ........................................................................................................ 25

2.5.1. Components of Psychological Wellbeing............................................................................. 26

2.5.2. Measuring Psychological Wellbeing ................................................................................... 28

2.6. Physical Wellbeing ................................................................................................................ 29

2.7. Empirical studies Psychological and Physical Well being ....................................................... 31

3.1. Research Design..................................................................................................................... 35

3.2. Participants ............................................................................................................................ 35

3.3. Instruments ............................................................................................................................ 36

3.3.2. Psychological Wellbeing Scale ........................................................................................... 36

3.4. Research Variables ................................................................................................................. 37

3.5. Procedure of Data Collection and Analysis ............................................................................. 38

3.5.1. Administration ................................................................................................................... 38

3.5.3. Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 39

3.6. Pilot testing ............................................................................................................................ 39

3.7. Ethical Issues ......................................................................................................................... 40

Chapter Four ......................................................................................................................................... 41

4.1. Background Information of Study Respondents ...................................................................... 41

4.2. Psychological Wellbeing of Participant .................................................................................. 44

4.3. Physical Wellbeing of Participant ........................................................................................... 47

4.4. Gender difference in psychological wellbeing......................................................................... 48

Name: _______________Signature: Date:_

Name: _______________Signature: Date:_

Name: _____________Signature: Date:_