The structural pattern of mental well-being of students based on the educational, social, emotional and physical atmosphere of the school through educational Resilient

Expended Abstract Introduction: In all societies providing mental health and wellbeing can be considered essential for students. Mental well-being and positive attitudes result in mental health and an increase a person’s motivation. Mental wellbeing can help a person to solve his or her problems with more power and achieve prosperity and a higher self-efficiency  One of the helpful environmental factors in mental evolution of teenagers is school. In this sense, educational system authorities are trying to provide suitable conditions in schools so as to raise the wellbeing of the students. The researchers believed that mental wellbeing in schools is affected by the quality of interaction between students and school climate. One type of human communication is the relationship between students and the educational system they are studying in. In educational systems, a lot of people are working, and students have direct or indirect contact with them. Also, one of the most critical settings for cognitive growth of students is the school which is defined as a key and influential point in this regard. It is in schools that educational, social, and behavioral skills are being learned. Acquiring these skills is possible by interacting with the school climate, which comprises teachers, classmates, and the curriculum.  Students’ success while facing an undesirable situation during education is related to resilience. This issue has recently been greatly emphasized in the field of Education. Resilience is defined as the ability to resist against stress and return to the normal balance after experiencing stressful factors. The resilience concept as the control or action against stressful factors should be used before they could hurt the people. Method: The participants of the study  were all high school (first period) female students of public schools of Tehran in the academic year 1396-1397. The sample size included 630 students (209 in grade 7, 213 in grade 8, and 208 in grade 9) selected by stratified random sampling method. The selected students studied in the districts 2 (196 students), 7 (176 students), 11 (133 students), and 18 (125 students). Measurement instruments  A- Kiz and Magiarmo Subjective Wellbeing  Scale (SWS) ( 2003) Subjective wellbeing scale of Kiz and Magiarmo  (SWS) ( 2003) is used for evaluating the emotional, psychological, and social wellbeing. This questionnaire include 45 questions and three subscales related to emotional, social, and psychological factors. The internal validity of subscale of emotional wellbeing in positive emotions was 0.91 and in negative emotions it was 0.78. Subscales of psychological and social wellbeing have moderate internal validity ranging from 0.4 to 0.7 and the total validity of both subscales was 0.8 and higher. The reliability coefficient or re-test reliability has been reported to be 0.86. B- Academic Resilience scale (ARI): This questionnaire included 29 questions and three subscales related to communicative, future direction, problem-oriented/optimistic items. Samuelz (2004) calculated the reliability of this questionnaire. He calculated the Cronbach alpha to estimate the reliability which was found to be 0.89. Also, the construct validity of the questionnaire was evaluated as desirable in his research. In Iran, this questionnaire was standardized by Sultan Nejad and his colleagues (2014). C- School climate  Questionnaire (2015): This questionnaire includes 70 questions and five scales and 11 subscales. The scales included: 1) safety, 2) learning, 3) interpersonal relations, 4) school climate, and 5) social media. This questionnaire has been translated by English experts and revised by Psychology experts. Its primary validity was assessed on 30 students, and its alpha Cronbach coefficient was found to be 0.883 for the whole questionnaire and 0.77 to 0.93 for its scales. Findings:  Table1: Descriptive Indexes of Marks of Questionnaire of School’s Climate and Resilient and Well-being Variable      Mean    standard deviation kurtosis skewness minimum maximum Security 15.82 2.90 -0.120 -0.454 7.50        24.00 Teaching and Learning 30.93 6.16 -0.256 0.068 10.00          45.00 Interpersonal Relationships 21.20 3.44 -0.217 -0.031 9.33            29.33 Learning Environment 21.89 4.23 -0.043 -0.166 10.00    32.50       Social Media 16.58 4.07 -0.375 -0.103 5.00 25.00 Resilient              68.78                    15.99          -0.298        -0.355    27.00      121.00 Well-being            160.38        27.92      0.424      0.623    65.00    245.00 Table2: Suitability Indexes of Calculated Measuring Modified Model of Questionnaire of School Climate and Well-being and Resilient          model 2χ df /df2χ RMSEA GFI AGFI CFI Modified Final   Model School Climate  5335/30 1788 2/98 0/057 0/882 0/854 0/890 Modified Final Model   Well- being 1976/27 646 3/05 0/057 0/896 0/887 0/890 Modified Final Resilient Model 1106/95 292 3/79 0.067 0/918 0/904 0/901 Table3: Factors of Total and Direct Way between Research Variables in Total Structural Model. Paths b S.E β Significance level   Direct path coefficients School Climate         Resilient 7.294 1.267 0.796 *** School Climate   Security 1.000 0.727 School Climate  Learning    3.554 0.496 0.974 *** School Climate     Relationships      1.551 0.233 1.086 *** School Climate    Environment                    2.595 0.366 0.938 *** School Climate     Media 0.245 0.042 0.528 *** School Climate    Well-being 3.320 0.706 0.789 *** Resilient Well-being 0.687 0.057 1.495 *** Security Emotional Security 1.000 0.390 Security Physical Security 0.818 0.149 0.399 *** Security Rules and Norms 1.627 0.240 0.770 *** Learning Social Learning 1.211 0.058 0.834 *** Learning   Learning Support 1.000 0.745 Interpersonal Relationships   Student Support 1.000 0.497 Interpersonal Relationships   Adult Support 2.350 0.189 0.737 *** Interpersonal Relationships Respect for Diversity          1.210 0.096 0.512 *** School Environment   Belong to the School 0.816 0.066 0.558 *** School Environment   Physical environment 1.000 0.712 Resilient   Communicational 1.000 1.239 Resilient   Future orientation 0.319 0.029 0.651 *** Resilient   Problem-oriented 0.216 0.019 0.659 *** Well-being     Emotion 1.000 0.677 Well-being    Psychological 2.050 0.115 0.874 *** Well-being    Social 1.221 0.089 0.658 *** Coefficient Indirect School ClimateWell- being 5.010 1.190 *** Coefficient Total School ClimateWell-  being 1.690 0.402    ***           Discussion: To explain the observed positive relationship between school climate and resilient in this research we should say that the results of different research studies show that resilient has relationship with keeping the mental health and wellbeing of people and its promotion (Kampfer, 2012). However, in recent years, researchers have emphasized the multidimensional nature of this construct. Multidimensional nature of resilient is based on evidence that people at risk while show adaptive and skilled functions in some areas show serious maladaptive consequences in other areas (Hashemi and Jokar, 2014).These results are consistent with many conducted studies like Martin’s (2013) research and that of Pandergast and Kaplan’s (2015). To explain the observed relationship between school climate and mental well-being with resilient mediation role, we should say that academic resilience is one of the variables that has a relationship with academic involvement, the mental, social climate of the classroom and with emotional atmosphere of the family (Latter, 1991). Research shows that students who may present the resistance in a special domain may be vulnerable in other domains (Sepah Mansur, 2016). This result is consistent with the study results of Golestani (2014), Hejazi and Musavisharifi (2015).  Besides, in order to explain a significant direct relationship between resilience and mental wellbeing, it can be said that people with high resilience in stressful situations and horrible events keep their psychological well-being and have psychological adaptability. Indeed, the direction of variables correlation shows that with higher resilience, the psychological well-being of students will increase (Wolf, 1995). This finding is in line with the research studies of Jokar and Sahragard (2007), Besharat et al. (2008), Tugade and Friedrikson (2004), and Friberg et al. (2006). Finally,  to explain a direct and significant relationship between school climate and well-being, researchers have found that school climate assists in comprehending and developing a high level of mental well-being in students and school staff. Moreover, the positive atmosphere of the school can help to solve many problems and decrease absence, suspension, and bullying. In addition, it promotes educational advances of students and their motivation for learning and mental well-being. Moreover working in this type of schools decreases teachers’ tiredness while increasing their activity. This result is consistent with the results of Borkar’s (2016) study.    The obtained results of structural equation modeling show: A direct and significant relationship between school climate  and resilient (β=0.796, P<0.01) An indirect and significant relationship between school climate and mental well-being with resilient mediation role. (β=0.496, P<0.05) A significant direct relationship between resilience and mental well-being (β=1.557, P<0.01) A direct and significant relationship between school climate and well-being (β=0.862, P<0.01). Ethical Considerations Funding There is no direct financial support from any entity or organization for the publication of this article. Authors’ contributions All authors contributed in producting of the research. Conflicts of interest This article does not overlap with other published works by the authors.. Acknowledgments In this article, all rights relating to references are cited and resources are carefully This study was funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Drug Control Headquarters.