🚨 Stress, self-control, relationships: what Year 5 students choose to work on
🔍💡 Psychosocial skills in secondary school: a cycle of 9 sessions in REP+ where students vote on the skills to work on. 🧠 Stress management ranks top among expressed needs, and remains the least well self-assessed dimension after the intervention. 📉 A useful reading for evaluating without overinterpreting.
📌 This report describes, session by session, a nine-hour cycle on psychosocial skills conducted with a Year 5 class in priority education. Its practical interest lies less in the numbers than in the protocol: having students vote on the skills to work on, anchoring them in lived situations, and then training them in groups. It also shows why a self-assessment questionnaire can yield lower scores after an intervention. It can be used to build a psychosocial skills cycle in secondary school and to anticipate the pitfalls of its evaluation.
Source :
📒 Psychosocial skills in secondary school: effects, limitations and contributions of an exploratory educational device for Year 5 students
✍️ Dr Cendrine Mercier, lecturer and psychologist, Nantes University / INSPE, Nantes Education Research Centre (CREN, UR 2661) - February 2026 HAL deposit - quasi-experimental exploratory study (pre-test / post-test without control group), academic year 2024-2025📜🔗LINK to the source
1️⃣ Analytical summary
Some CPS to continue in secondary school, under educational conditions
The author starts from the observation that CPS are recognised as levers of well-being and success, but that their work in secondary school remains less documented than in nursery and primary (p. 3-6). The transition into adolescence, the increase in academic demands, and the complexification of peer relationships make, according to her, this work necessary (p. 6). The framework chosen is the classification by Public Health France into nine competencies divided into three families: cognitive, emotional, and social (p. 4-5). The report also includes critical readings: the risk of “ psychologisation” of educational inequalities when CPS are addressed outside of learning, and non-automatic effects of cooperation without support (p. 7). The audience is a class of 22 students in Year 7, aged 12 to 13, in a REP+ secondary school in Sarthe (p. 7-8).
A reusable protocol and an evaluation lesson
The device includes nine one-hour sessions over the 2024-2025 academic year: discovery and classification of CPS with pictograms, auto-positioning and voting, anchoring in daily life, four training sessions (role plays, mini-skits), followed by a final auto-positioning (p. 8-9). The students primarily identify stress management (81.8%), self-control (63.6%) and constructive relationships (45.5%) (p. 11). Between the two measures, no difference is statistically significant (p. 14). Constructive relationships progress descriptively (3.06 to 3.59), while several scores decrease (p. 13). The author suggests seeing this as a “response shift” effect: better understanding a competency leads to a more critical self-assessment (p. 14-15). This interpretation remains a hypothesis, untested in the study.
2️⃣ Key points of the document
1️⃣ A short, progressive cycle integrated into school time
Nine sessions of 60 minutes on a fixed slot, articulating cultural awareness, clarification, individual reflection and collective training, in reference to the recommendations of Public Health France (p. 8-9).
2️⃣ The students' vote as a tool for identifying needs
Each student chooses three skills to work on; stress management, self-control and constructive relationships stand out. The author notes a partial convergence with the lowest scores from the pre-test (p. 11-12, p. 15).
3️⃣ No measurable effect in the short term
The paired t-tests show no significant difference (p > .05) between the two times; stress management remains the lowest dimension (2.85 then 2.88) (p. 13-14).
4️⃣ Stable scores from one time to another
The high correlations between T1 and T2 for stress management (r = .806), self-control (r = .624) and self-awareness (r = .600) indicate that each student maintains their relative position in the group (p. 14).
5️⃣ A drop in score is not necessarily a setback
The author links the observed drops (self-awareness, communication, problem-solving) to the “response shift” described by Howard et al. (1979): a more demanding frame of reference after the intervention (p. 14-15).
3️⃣ Action points for local stakeholders
1️⃣ Use the framework of 9 sessions as the basis for the cycle
The outline on p. 8-9 can structure a CPS project in secondary school or in youth collective care. It remains to adapt the activities to the audience; the report does not detail the precise content of sessions 5 to 8 nor the student booklet.
2️⃣ Have the group choose the skills
Use the grid from the appendix (p. 18) for each young person to position themselves from 0 to 5 and choose three skills. Display the collective result and discuss it (p. 9, p. 11). Consider the role of the adult, who can add one or two skills depending on the group climate (p. 9).
3️⃣ Anchor each skill in real-life situations
Before the training, ask the young people for situations from their daily lives where the skill is mastered or not (session 4, p. 9). This is a direct response to the risk of working "off the ground" discussed on p. 7.
4️⃣ Plan for specific and longer work on stress
The management of stress is the priority for students and the only dimension that is almost unchanged (p. 11, p. 13-14). A short cycle seems insufficient; support from school health staff or a specialised partner can be considered.
5️⃣ Do not evaluate solely by self-questionnaire before/after
Supplement with a retrospective pre-test ("before, I was at…") or by observations, to limit the readjustment effect described on p. 14-15. Present to funders a drop in score with this reading grid, without making it a proof of effectiveness.
6️⃣ Care for the exposure of students in role plays
The mini-skits in front of the group seem to support constructive relationships (p. 15). For vulnerable young people, establish group rules, a right not to play, and observer roles (see section H).
4️⃣ Additional references
Health Practical Resources (links to be checked manually)
« The key role of psychosocial skills in promoting the mental health of young people based on evidence… » — PES sheet, January 2026. Link
Thematic page « Psychosocial Skills » of the PES blog. Link
External references published after 2024
1️⃣ Public Health France — Psychosocial skills. An operational framework for expert professionals and CPS trainers. Volume II (February 2026, 224 p.)
Completes Volume I cited by the author; focused on self-control, the regulation of emotions and stress, and the resolution of relational difficulties, which are the priorities voted by the students. Download (PDF)
2️⃣ IGÉSR — Psychosocial skills: a requirement to support the emancipatory promise of the republican School (report no. 24-25-108B, October 2025, published in March 2026)
Analyses the barriers to the integration of CPS in schools and the risks of normalisation of behaviours, echoing the reservations of Bautier and Delarue-Breton discussed p. 7. Page of the report
3️⃣ Ministry of National Education / Éduscol — Framing note for a common culture in favour of the development of CPS (Éduscol page updated in April 2026)
Specifies the integration of CPS into subjects and school life, with the associated ministerial roadmap: useful for incorporating a cycle like that of the report into the establishment project. Framing note (PDF)
5️⃣ Frequently asked questions
1️⃣ On what definition of CPS is the study based?
On the classification of Public Health France: nine skills spread across three families, cognitive (self-awareness, self- management, constructive decisions), emotional (awareness of emotions and stress, regulation, stress management) and social (communication, relationships, problem-solving) (p. 4-5).
2️⃣ How long does the programme last?
Nine sessions of about one hour, at a fixed slot in the middle of the morning, spread over the 2024-2025 school year (p. 8).
3️⃣ How do students choose the skills to work on?
During the session 3, each person fills out a self-assessment table and selects three priority skills; the result is shared on the board and the teacher can add one or two (p. 9).
4️⃣ Has the programme improved students' skills?
The results do not allow us to say: no difference is statistically significant between the two measures (p. 14). Only constructive relationships progress descriptively (p. 13, p. 15).
5️⃣ Why do some scores decrease after the intervention?
The author puts forward the hypothesis of a "response shift": by better understanding a skill, the student evaluates themselves more stringently (p. 14-15). This explanation is plausible but is not verified by the study.
6️⃣ What are the main risks reported in the cited literature?
Working on the CPS outside of learning can place the responsibility for their difficulties on the students; CPS not explicitly taught can become implicit norms; cooperation without support can produce negative effects (p. 7).
7️⃣ Can the questionnaire be reused?
The grid is presented in the appendix (p. 18): nine skills, scale from 0 to 5, choice of three skills. It has not been subject to the described psychometric validation; the report is under copyright, it is necessary to cite the source.
6️⃣ FALC Version (Easy To Read and Understand)
What does this document talk about?
This document talks about psychosocial skills.
It is also called CPS.
CPS help to know oneself.
They help to manage one's emotions and stress.
They help to live well with others.
A researcher worked with a Year 5 class.
The class has 22 students aged 12 and 13.
The college is in a priority area, in Sarthe.
What was done?
The students attended 9 one-hour sessions over a year.
First, they discovered CPS with images.
Then, each student rated their skills.
Each student chose 3 skills to work on.
Then the class did games and small scenes.
At the end, each student rated their skills again.
What did we learn?
The students mainly chose to work on stress.
They also chose self-control and relationships.
After the sessions, the ratings changed little.
The relationships between students seem a bit better.
Stress remains difficult to manage for many students.
Some notes decreased at the end.
The researcher thinks that students judge themselves more clearly.
This is not necessarily a failure.
To see real changes, one must work longer.
7️⃣ Cross-sectional analysis — values of Health Practices
Literacy : Pictograms, definitions and card games are used to make the CPS accessible (p. 8), but the student booklet is not distributed with the report.
Empowerment : Students self-assess and vote on the skills to work on, which places them in a position of actors in choosing the objectives (p. 9, p. 11).
Participation : Negotiated ranking of the CPS in groups and collective feedback on the board (p. 8-9); students do not participate in the evaluation itself.
Community health: The collective dimension is limited to the class group; families, external peers and the neighbourhood environment are not mobilised.
Ethics : The risk of psychologising educational inequalities and normalising behaviours is explicitly discussed (p. 7, p. 16).
Human rights: The choice of a REP+ college affects a socially exposed audience; no element on family consent or data anonymisation is described.
Intersectorality : No partnership outside of the National Education and university is mentioned; the link with school health is not addressed.
Partnership : A researcher-teacher model is implicit (“trainers”, “ teacher”, p. 9) without being formalised.
Fight against discrimination: Discrimination is not addressed directly; the warning against CPS established as implicit norms that widen the gaps between students approaches this (p. 7).
8️⃣ Evaluation of the reliability of the resource
Scientific relevance: moderate to low for conclusions, correct as exploration
Strong points: identified academic author, described protocol, statistics presented with means, standard deviations, paired tests and correlations, acknowledged limitations (sample size, absence of control group) (p. 8, p. 14).
Methodological limitations: a single class, no control group, measures solely declarative, unvalidated questionnaire, variable numbers according to analyses (22 registered, 20 at T1, 16 to 18 in matched comparison) (p. 7-8, p. 10, p. 12-13).
Inconsistencies raised: p. 10, the text attributes 2.80 to stress management and 2.98 to emotion regulation, whereas table 1 indicates the opposite; the SPF 2022 classification is cited without appearing in the bibliography (only Volume I of 2025 appears there); the reference Mercier et al. (2016) mixes a conference title and a DOI of the journal article (p. 17).
Theoretical supports to nuance: the study by Ayaz et al. (2026), mobilised to assert that CPS are educable, concerns a programme of physical activity with autistic children, a context far removed from the ordinary college (p. 6).
Operational relevance: good for design, limited for impact evaluation
The framework of sessions, the principle of voting and the annex grid are directly usable. The document does not provide the detailed content of the activities or the student booklet. It is more useful for carefully designing and evaluating a CPS cycle than for justifying its effectiveness to a funder.
9️⃣ Strategic hashtags
#healthpractices #PsychosocialSkills #YouthMentalHealth #SchoolHealthPromotion #College #PriorityEducation #ActionEvaluation #StressManagement
You can support Health Practices: https://www.pratiquesensante.com/blog/annonces-28/pour-soutenir-pratiques-en-sante-3253
This article has been developed in accordance with the Charter
of the use of artificial intelligence of Health Practices.
Click on the image 