Esther Mertens

52 | Chapter 3 Overall, the quality of the observed R&W lessons was good (38%) to very good (54%) according to the experts. In conclusion, based on the self-reports and observations, the majority of the R&W lessons was indeed implemented and fidelity to the manual was moderate to high. Control. In the Control condition students received care as usual, which varied between schools. For example, in one school, students had a teacher as personal coach with whom they had regular meetings, discussed their wellbeing, and could go to for advice. In another school, students could go to their mentor, a teacher, when they experienced problems, participated in a project week about ‘being different’, signed an anti-bullying contract, and discussed bullying in the class. In yet another school, students also had a mentor, a teacher, whom they could go to when they experienced difficulties and there was an ‘anti-bullying coordinator’ at the school. This coordinator facilitated actions to prevent or stop bullying which could differ per situation. Primary Outcomes Intrapersonal domain Psychological wellbeing. Tomeasure the presence of positive emotions, students completed the subscale Psychological wellbeing of the KIDSCREEN-27 (Ravens-Sieberer & The European KIDSCREEN Group, 2006). The subscale consists of 7 items (e.g., “Past week, did you have fun?”) rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = never to 5 = always ). Some items were recoded so that high scores indicated higher levels of psychological wellbeing (Cronbach’s α = .76 - .83). Resilience. To assess students’ ability to bounce back from challenges that can arise in life, students completed the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale – short version (Davidson & Connor, 2017) consisting of 10 items (e.g., “Able to adapt to change.”) rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (0 = not true at all to 4 =  true nearly all the time ; Cronbach’s α = .79 - .92). Sexual autonomy. Tomeasure students’ coping skills in sexual situations, students completed 5 items from the study Sex under 25 (e.g., “When I amwith someone I like, I feel at ease.”; De Graaf, Meijer, Poelman, & Vanwesenbeeck, 2005) rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = never to 4 = always ). Some items were recoded so that high scores indicated higher levels of sexual autonomy. Reliability was poor at T1 (Cronbach’s α = .53) and adequate at T2, T3, and T4 (Cronbach’s α = .62 - .65). Internalizing behavior. The presence of internalizing problems was measured with the internalizing subscale of the short version of the Youth Self Report (YSR; Chorpita et al., 2010). The subscale consists of 6 items (e.g., “I worry a lot.”) rated on a 3-point Likert-type scale (0 = never to 2 = often ; Cronbach’s α = .79 - .86).