Belonging has been described as the need for positive regard from others (Rogers, Reference Rogers1951), affiliation motivation (McClelland, Reference McClelland and Coltheart1987), and the desire for relatedness (Vallerand, Reference Vallerand1997). Friedman (Reference Friedman and Current2007) described a sense of belonging as the development of the self and identity building. It is a well accepted that sense of belonging is not dependent on participation with, or proximity to, others. Rather, it relies on perceptions about the quality of social interactions (Baumeister & Leary, Reference Baumeister and Leary1995). Therefore, belonging could be considered as one's perception of his or her involvement in a social system or environment (Hagerty, Lynch-Sauer, Patusky, Bouwsema, & Collier, Reference Hagerty, Lynch-Sauer, Patusky, Bouwsema and Collier1992).
An extensive review of the literature demonstrates that belonging is an important construct, not only at a theoretical level, but also at an empirical level (Hagerty, Williams, & Oe, Reference Hagerty, Williams and Oe2002; Hale, Hannum, & Espelage, Reference Hale, Hannum and Espelage2005). A marked proportion of the psychological literature suggests that general belonging is a vital component of psychological and physical health, and these effects are typically sustained (Daley & Buchanan, Reference Daley and Buchanan1999; Poulton, Caspi, & Milne, Reference Poulton, Caspi and Milne2002; Wadsworth, Thomsen, Saltzman, Connor-Smith, & Compas, Reference Wadsworth, Thomsen, Saltzman, Connor-Smith and Compas2001).
A sense of belonging is considered to play a fundamental role in adolescent development, particularly in respect to identity formation (Brechwald & Prinstein, Reference Brechwald and Prinstein2011; Davis, Reference Davis2012), psychosocial adjustment, and transition to adulthood (O'Connor, Reference O'Connor2010). The literature has also demonstrated that school belonging, more specifically, is an important factor in the successful psychosocial adjustment of young people and presents a purpose for schools to engage in interventions and strategies that might promote belonging to school (Lonczak, Abbott, Hawkins, Kosterman, & Catalano, Reference Lonczak, Abbott, Hawkins, Kosterman and Catalano2002; Nutbrown & Clough, Reference Nutbrown and Clough2009; O'Connor, Reference O'Connor2010; O'Connor, Sanson, & Frydenberg, Reference O'Connor, Sanson, Frydenberg, Frydenberg and Reevy2012; Sari, Reference Sari2012).
It has been argued that schools play an important role in fostering a sense of belonging for students (Allen & Bowles, Reference Allen and Bowles2013) because they are important institutions that can build social networks for young people. Yet, in a review of the literature concerned with school belonging, Allen and Bowles (Reference Allen and Bowles2013) have argued that the importance of a student's sense of belongingness to school has not been given the same degree of attention as a student's academic success. This finding is consistent with the lower level of attention devoted to other areas of preventive interventions in schools, such as health promotion and social and emotional learning (Collaborative for Academic Social and Emotional Learning [CASEL], 2003; Hagerty et al., Reference Hagerty, Lynch-Sauer, Patusky, Bouwsema and Collier1992; West, Sweeting, & Leyland, Reference West, Sweeting and Leyland2004). Very few examples of interventions aimed at specifically increasing a student's sense of belonging can be found at the secondary school level in Australian schools (e.g., SenseAbility; Beyond Blue, 2014); however, the absence of school belonging in whole-school intervention programs appears to be a universal issue, with very few examples in the literature (e.g., Centres for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2009). One reason why school belonging is seldom examined in schools could be due to the absence of a model or framework that schools can employ to foster belonging in students. The field of school belonging research in this respect is largely theoretical, and this may be one factor that restricts the development of belongingness interventions (e.g., in addition to definitional and measurement issues).
Clearly, there is a need for frameworks that assist schools to foster school belonging. Yet, only a small number of conceptual frameworks have focused on school belonging at the student level (e.g., motivation, individual characteristics, emotional instability; Brendtro, Brokenleg, & VanBockern, 2002; Connell & Wellborn, Reference Connell, Wellborn, Gunnar and Sroufe1991; Malti & Noam, Reference Malti and Noam2009; Ryan & Deci, Reference Ryan and Deci2000). Further, these frameworks are limited because they have focused on school belonging as an internal, intra-individual phenomenon and, thus, have not accounted for relational factors and broader aspects in the school environment that influence a student's sense of belonging. While a few frameworks have recognised the importance of school resources and support (e.g., CDC, 2009; McMahon et al., Reference McMahon, Parnes, Keys and Viola2008; Wallace, Ye, & Chhuon, Reference Wallace, Ye and Chhuon2012), very few of these frameworks have presented school belonging as a multidimensional construct within a multilayered social ecology based on empirical evidence (e.g., Rowe, Stewart, & Patterson, Reference Rowe, Stewart and Patterson2007; Waters, Cross, & Reunion, Reference Waters, Cross and Runion2009).
The Socio-Ecological Framework of School Belonging
We propose that school belonging is a student's sense of affiliation to his or her school, influenced by individual, relational, and organisational factors inside a broader school community, and within a political, cultural, and geographical landscape unique to each school setting. Put more simply, school belonging is one's feeling of being connected to a school within a school social system.
In this conceptual paper, we propose that school belonging is a multilayered socio-ecological phenomena, and we apply Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) ecological framework for human development to school belonging in order to explore the various layers that affect a student's sense of school belonging. Bronfenbrenner's ecological framework for human development is concerned with systems in society and suggests that for young people, the family is the first unit to which children belong. This is followed by school and community, with each student belonging to a broader network of groups and systems.
All children are at the centre of multiple levels of influence (i.e., the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem) and schools can have a significant effect on their development and psychosocial adjustment (Bronfenbrenner, Reference Bronfenbrenner1979). Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) ecological framework for human development serves as a reminder that within any school setting, each student is a part of a greater whole influenced by formal and informal groupings, and overarching systems that are common and typically represented within all schools.
Socio-ecological frameworks such as Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) emphasise the importance of social relationships but also include tangible environmental, physical, and ecological variables, such as classrooms and resources (Bronfenbrenner, Reference Bronfenbrenner1979). The socio-ecological layers represented in such frameworks may provide a structure for schools to improve school belonging by working at the level of the individual, working with interpersonal relationships (e.g., peer, teacher, and parent), and addressing whole school approaches (Saab, Reference Saab2009; Waters et al., Reference Waters, Cross and Runion2009; Waters, Cross, & Shaw, Reference Waters, Cross and Shaw2010).
Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) ecological framework for human development provides the most widely applied theoretical construct to date with which to investigate belonging in an organisational setting such as a school, while acknowledging the innate desire humans have to belong (Baumeister & Leary, Reference Baumeister and Leary1995; Saab, Reference Saab2009; Waters et al., Reference Waters, Cross and Runion2009; Waters et al., Reference Waters, Cross and Shaw2010). This may be because Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological framework represents the varied layers and systems within a school whereas other models and frameworks may only examine constructs directly related to the individual student (Brendtro et al., Reference Brendtro, Brokenleg and Van Bockern2002; Malti & Noam, Reference Malti and Noam2009).
The current conceptual paper proposes a socio-ecological framework of school belonging (Figure 1) to explore school belonging at the individual (through individual characteristics), microsystem (through relationships with parents, peers, and teachers), mesosystem (through school rules and practices), exosystem (through the extended school community), and macrosystem levels (through legislation, social norms, and government initiatives such as the nationally collected data on academic achievement).
The socio-ecological framework of school belonging.
The framework can be used by educators, school leaders, and school psychologists to intervene at various levels across the school to enhance school belonging. It also provides an organising framework for researchers in the field to categorise the many different research findings on school belonging at the individual, classroom, and organisational levels. Such a classification system will benefit schools and shed light on which layers within the schools should be prioritised.
While there is plenty of research supporting the importance of school belonging, very few attempts have been made to understand how it can be fostered. Previous studies (Goodenow, Reference Goodenow1992; Hurtado & Carter, Reference Hurtado and Carter1997; Juvonen, Reference Juvonen, Alexander and Winne2006) have only focused on the definition, measurement, and importance of school belonging without identifying the precursors and methods for fostering a sense of belonging in school settings. Therefore, this article attempts to address this research-practice gap in schools by specifically looking at the themes that foster school belonging through Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) socio-ecological framework for human development. This article also endeavours to draw upon existing empirical research to support the development of a framework. The translation of findings into an evidence-based framework can assist schools to address the research-practice gap and provide the necessary antecedent conditions for fostering school belonging (Hirschkorn & Geelan, Reference Hirschkorn and Geelan2008; Rowe & Stewart, Reference Rowe and Stewart2011). Conceptual frameworks can be viewed as theories in their early stages, according to Sharma and Romas (Reference Sharma and Romas2008), and as such, they should use empirical evidence and be subject to ongoing testing to further develop an evidence base.
The framework used to support the socio-ecological framework of school belonging is based on the work of Wingspread Declaration on School Connections (2004), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2009), as well as other research and various measurement instruments of school belonging (Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, Reference Appleton, Christenson, Kim and Reschly2006; Goodenow, Reference Goodenow1992; Libbey, Reference Libbey2004; McNeely, Nonnemaker, & Blum, Reference McNeely, Nonnemaker and Blum2002). This thematic framework represents a sample of important tiers in the literature on school belonging to broadly explore the question: What themes influence school belonging? The studies that informed the development of the socio-ecological framework of school belonging were sourced from electronic databases such as EBSCO's Discovery search layer, including Ovid Medline, Mental Health Abstracts, PsycINFO, Social Sciences Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts via SocioFile, Academic Search Premier, Social Sciences Citation Index, and ERIC. Studies were sourced from English-speaking countries and published within the last 20 years. Therefore, a broad range of studies have been used to support the development of the socio-ecological framework of school belonging.
The Layers and Their Interactions
The socio-ecological framework of school belonging outlines five levels of interconnected layers within an ecology that supports school belonging. The levels start with the individual and move in concentric rings outwards through the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem. The five layers of the socio-ecological framework of school belonging and associated evidence based practices will be discussed below.
Individual
The inner portion of the socio-ecological framework of school belonging represents the individual student and associated individual-level themes that relate to his or her sense of school belonging. Past literature indicates three distinct aspects within an individual student that have been found to correlate with school belonging: academic motivation, emotional stability, and personal characteristics (social and emotional competencies).
Academic motivation includes variables related to performance, objective measures (e.g., test scores and grades), classroom engagement, and perceived value and usefulness of the curriculum and school (Wingspread Declaration on School Connections,Footnote 12004). Gillen-O'Neel and Fuligni (Reference Gillen-O'Neel and Fuligni2013) performed longitudinal within-person analyses with 572 young people aged between 13 and 19 years over a 4-year period. The results suggested that school belonging was positively associated with a higher level of perceived academic value. The authors suggest that when young people feel connected to their school, they are more likely to find school useful and be academically motivated.
Emotional stability is defined as the absence of maladaptive behaviour, psychopathology, or persistent distress, thus including the absence of mental illness (Cole, Llera, & Pemberton, Reference Cole, Llera and Pemberton2009). One example of an emotional instability variable that has been studied in the literature on school belonging is anxiety where a consistent inverse relationship has been found within its association with school belonging (Williams & Galliher, Reference Williams and Galliher2006; Lee & Robbins, Reference Lee and Robbins2000). It is unlikely that schools will use the term emotional instability in policy and practice. Instead, schools are more likely to build emotional stability and use terminology based on psychological health and wellbeing (Donovan, Reference Donovan2011). This is why the term emotional stability has been used in the framework of school belonging rather than emotional instability. Emotional stability has not been examined in previous frameworks of school belonging; therefore, the socio-ecological framework of school belonging is unique in that it represents this important theme.
The third theme at the student level that has been shown to relate to school belonging involves personal characteristics (i.e., social and emotional competencies), such as coping skills, positive affect, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-concept (Hawkins & Weis, Reference Hawkins and Weis1985; Faircloth, Reference Faircloth2009; Reschly, Huebner, Appleton, & Antaramian, Reference Reschly, Huebner, Appleton and Antaramian2008; Samdal, Nutbeam, Wold, & Kannas, Reference Samdal, Nutbeam, Wold and Kannas1998; Sirin & Rogers-Sirin, Reference Sirin and Rogers-Sirin2004). Frydenberg, Care, Freeman, and Chan (Reference Frydenberg, Care, Freeman and Chan2009) found that students who engaged in productive coping (i.e., the ability to successfully regulate behaviours, cognitions, and emotions in response to daily stressors) were more likely to exhibit a greater sense of belonging to their school. Other research (e.g., Reschly et al., Reference Reschly, Huebner, Appleton and Antaramian2008; Ryzin, Gravely, & Roseth, Reference Ryzin, Gravely and Roseth2009) has demonstrated that positive emotions like optimism, hope, and hopefulness are positively associated with school belonging as well. Reschly et al. (Reference Reschly, Huebner, Appleton and Antaramian2008) identified that social and emotional competencies such as having a positive affect and productive coping skills play an important role in fostering school belonging and vice versa. Therefore, when schools engage in practices that encourage academic motivation, build emotional stability, and foster certain personal characteristics (e.g., coping skills, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-regulation), this will likely increase the students’ sense of school belonging.
The direction of the relationships between academic motivation, emotional stability, and personal characteristics with school belonging has not been accurately determined from past research, but it is likely the relationship is bidirectional (e.g., Goodenow & Grady, Reference Goodenow and Grady1993; Ryan, Reference Ryan1995; Klem & Connell, Reference Klem and Connell2004; Zimmer-Gembeck, Chipuer, Hanisch, Creed, & McGregor, Reference Zimmer-Gembeck, Chipuer, Hanisch, Creed and McGregor2006). As such, it is suggested that while academic motivation, emotional stability, and personal characteristics may increase a sense of school belonging, school belonging may also lead to an increase in academic motivation, emotional stability, and personal characteristics (such as self-esteem and self-efficacy). Schools seeking to build school belonging can do so by creating high academic motivation, building strong emotional stability, and fostering personal characteristics of students.
Table 1 outlines a set of evidence-based practices designed to increase school belonging at the individual (student) level, based on the three themes of academic motivation, emotional instability, and personal characteristics (Caraway, Tucker, Reinke, & Hall, Reference Caraway, Tucker, Reinke and Hall2003; Zimmer-Gembeck et al., Reference Zimmer-Gembeck, Chipuer, Hanisch, Creed and McGregor2006; Sirin & Rogers-Sirin, Reference Sirin and Rogers-Sirin2004). That is, these practices are directed at the student and designed to boost his or her academic motivation, cultivate emotional stability, and foster personal characteristics such as coping skills, self-esteem, positive affect, and prosocial goal behaviour. Future intervention studies are needed to confirm the potential for academic motivation, emotional stability, and personal characteristics to increase school belonging, but Table 1 represents key independent variables found in studies that have examined school belonging that have reported a significant and positive relationship and have reported medium to large effect sizes (medium ≥ .30, large ≥ .50, Cohen, Reference Cohen1988) ranging from r = .32 to r = .72. These variables are presented alongside effective evidence-based practices identified in previous research derived from the literature.
Individual Level Practices Associated With Socio-Ecological Framework of School Belonging
Note: Practices are derived from the literature as indicated.
Microsystem
The importance of a student's relationship with parents, peers, and teachers has been illustrated through various frameworks incorporating school belonging (e.g., CDC, 2009; Connell & Wellborn, Reference Connell, Wellborn, Gunnar and Sroufe1991). One example is the Self-System Process Model applied to educational settings by Connell and Wellborn (Reference Connell, Wellborn, Gunnar and Sroufe1991). Elements of this model include relationship skills with peers and adults, self-awareness of feelings, emotional regulation, and conflict resolution skills. Thus, it is clear that both the individual and microsystem levels work together to foster school belonging.
Brophy (Reference Brophy2004) encourages educators to enhance students’ positive dispositional traits such as initiative and self-perceived competence, which contribute to social interactions and relatedness to adults and peers within a school setting. Through Brophy's work, based on a systematic review of motivational literature, the findings suggest that the individual and microsystem levels of the socio-ecological framework interact, because when a school builds the personal characteristics of self-perceived competence (e.g., self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-concept), this increases the students’ relational skills. This in turn strengthens relationships within the students’ microsystem (e.g., with parents, peers, and teachers).
Peer support has been found to be an important variable in influencing a sense of school belonging (Goodenow & Grady, Reference Goodenow and Grady1993; Hamm & Faircloth, Reference Hamm and Faircloth2005; Reschly, Busch, Betts, Deno, & Long, Reference Reschly, Busch, Betts, Deno and Long2009; Osterman, Reference Osterman2000). Libbey (Reference Libbey2004) found this variable to be especially valid on measures that looked at school connectedness. The literature suggests that peers may facilitate adolescent students’ feelings of being connected to school through social and academic support (Wentzel, Reference Wentzel1998), acceptance (Wang & Eccles, Reference Wang and Eccles2012), trust (Garcia-Reid, Reid, & Peterson, Reference Garcia-Reid, Reid and Peterson2005), or merely being present (e.g., having friends at school; Whitlock, Reference Whitlock2006).
In the literature, parents are also found to play an important role in fostering school belonging (Brewster & Bowen, Reference Brewster and Bowen2004; Wang & Eccles, Reference Wang and Eccles2012). Studies have shown that when parents provide support and show care, compassion, and encouragement towards academic endeavours, young people are more likely to exhibit greater connectedness to school (Benner et al., Reference Benner, Graham and Mistry2008; Brewster & Bowen, Reference Brewster and Bowen2004; Carter, McGee, Taylor, & Williams, Reference Carter, McGee, Taylor and Williams2007; Wang & Eccles, Reference Wang and Eccles2012).
The importance of teachers towards student outcomes has been widely studied (e.g., Anderman, Reference Anderman2002; Hattie, Reference Hattie2009; Wang & Eccles, Reference Wang and Eccles2012). In a large-scale synthesis of research, Hattie (Reference Hattie2009) ranked a teacher-student relationship (large effect size, d = .72) as an important contributor to enhancing academic outcomes in students. In respect to school belonging, a study by Brewster and Bowen (Reference Brewster and Bowen2004) involving 699 high school students in the United States likewise established that while support from others (e.g., parents) was indeed beneficial for students, teacher support was the more important factor. This finding has been widely supported by other studies (e.g., Anderman, Reference Anderman2003; Garcia-Reid, Reference Garcia-Reid2007; Johnson, Reference Johnson2009; Sakiz, Reference Sakiz2012).
Table 2 outlines examples of evidence-based strategies that specifically target the microsystem layer of the socio-ecological framework. Similar to Table 1, the approaches outlined are derived from the literature, as indicated in the table, and developed from key independent variables found in the literature that reported a significant and positive relationship with school belonging, with effect sizes ranging from medium to large strength, r = .30 to r = .86 (Cohen, Reference Cohen1988). Future research is needed to evaluate what specific interventions are needed for the themes of peer, parent, and teacher support to increase school belonging, but this table represents some examples of approaches found in the previous literature worth exploring.
Microsystem Level Practices Associated With Socio-Ecological Framework of School Belonging
Note: Practices are derived from the literature as indicated.
Mesosystem
The mesosystem can be seen as a byproduct of the interactions among the layers in the socio-ecological framework, and thus not only represents school processes, practices, policy, and pedagogy (Libbey, Reference Libbey2004; Saab, Reference Saab2009), but also highlights the unique bidirectional interactions of the features within the microsystem layer. Tillery, Varjas, Roach, Kuperminc, and Meyers (Reference Tillery, Varjas, Roach, Kuperminc and Meyers2013) suggested that support for others within a school system (parents, peers, and teachers), may be made stronger or weaker by aspects of the mesosystem, such as the organisational structure and practices within the school. For example, schools promote safety at the mesosystem level through school rules and policies (Saab, Reference Saab2009). Feeling safe at school has been identified in the literature as an important factor in a student's sense of belonging to school (CDC, 2009; Samdal et al., Reference Samdal, Nutbeam, Wold and Kannas1998; Wingspread Declaration on School Connections, 2004; Whitlock, Reference Whitlock2006) and has also been found to be a central theme in measures of school connectedness and school belonging (Libbey, Reference Libbey2004).
School vision and mission statements are another example of one element of the mesosystem in the socio-ecological framework of school belonging. School vision and mission statements that outline a school's purpose may provide a school with an opportunity to create a shared vision in respect to how school belonging is prioritised. School vision and mission statements are, therefore, appropriate to include in a socio-ecological framework specific to a school setting due to their ability to offer a vehicle to promote a school's commitment to fostering school belonging. The development of school vision and mission statements that prioritise school belongingness can be created by schools to promote the school's approach to fostering school belonging and assist the development of goals and objectives around creating a stronger school community (CDC, 2009).
A number of studies have explored the importance of students’ belief in school rules, discipline, and fairness upon school belonging (Brown & Evans, Reference Brown and Evans2002; Libbey, Reference Libbey2004). A review of the literature on the subject shows strong evidence for school engagement and retention in schools where discipline is enforced consistently and fairly (Finn & Voelkl, Reference Finn and Voelkl1993; Rumberger, Reference Rumberger1995), therefore policies concerned with these variables should be an important consideration for all schools.
Multiple group memberships, such as those provided by extracurricular activities, are another example of a prevalent theme in the literature on school belonging. Researchers have found that a sense of school belonging can be positively influenced by the number of group memberships (Drolet & Arcand, Reference Drolet and Arcand2013) and number of extracurricular activities a student may subscribe to (Dotterer, McHale, & Crouter, Reference Dotterer, McHale and Crouter2007; Libbey, Reference Libbey2004). One example is a study by Soria, Lingren Clark, and Coffin Koch (2011), who found that students’ perceived sense of school belonging was influenced by whether or not they participated in extracurricular groups. The researchers investigated 1,865 students who participated in a range of student groups formed during orientation week activities. Results showed that students who attended these activities reported a higher sense of school belonging than those who did not. Furthermore, these students were more likely to have a higher grade point average than the respective cohort of non-participants. A similar relationship between a sense of belonging and extracurricular activities has been found in other research (Blomfield & Barber, Reference Blomfield and Barber2010; Dotterer et al., Reference Dotterer, McHale and Crouter2007; Knifsend & Graham, Reference Knifsend and Graham2012; Waters et al., Reference Waters, Cross and Shaw2010).
As well as fostering themes that positively correlate to school belonging at the individual and microsystem levels, it is clear from the literature that school leaders may also intervene at the mesosystem of the socio-ecological system. Table 3 outlines a set of evidence-based practices for schools derived from the past studies, as outlined below. These practices aim to foster school belonging primarily at the policy and practice level. The mesosystem level can include many variables, and it can be difficult for researchers to disentangle the multiple causal relationships. These practices should therefore be interpreted with some degree of caution and may serve as a source of further research.
Mesosystem Level Practices Associated with Socio-Ecological Framework of School Belonging
Note: Practices are derived from the literature as indicated.
Exosystem
The exosystem represents the community surrounding the school and encompasses the local neighbourhood, grandparents and extended families (although depending on the family structure they may also reside in the microsystem), local businesses, and community groups (Saab, Reference Saab2009). Like the mesosystem, this layer is facilitated by the opportunities provided by schools that bring these groups together. Cemalcilar (Reference Cemalcilar2010) suggests that changing school-level practices at the exosystem level (or macro-level through reforms and laws) is a valid recommendation for interventions designed to foster school belonging. Some concrete examples would be for schools to connect with local businesses or other schools within the neighbourhood, or to implement school activities that involve the broader school community and the extended families of its students. Schools may also consider engaging with local community partners who are willing to provide a range of services within the school (e.g., a visiting GP, nurse health checks, dental services; CDC, 2009).
Less empirical information is available for the exosystem and macrosystem levels on school belonging (Brown Kirschman & Karazsia, Reference Brown Kirschman, Karazsia, Roberts, Aylward and Wu2014). This is because it can be difficult to examine the exosystem or macrosystem, especially through studies concerned with preventative interventions like school belonging. These layers do not have a direct association with the student (or individual) where most studies are focused. Studies at the exosystem and macrosystem level on preventative interventions have traditionally engaged whole neighbourhoods at a considerable cost of time and resources (Brown Kirschman & Karazsia, Reference Brown Kirschman, Karazsia, Roberts, Aylward and Wu2014). Furthermore, publically available data concerned with the exosystem are not available as they are for other systems (e.g., mesosystem, microsystem).
Macrosystem
The macrosystem layer represents broader legislation and public policies at the federal level and includes factors such as regulations, guidelines, and government-driven initiatives and data collection (Saab, Reference Saab2009) as well as the historical (e.g., past events, climate, collective attitudes, and conditions) and cultural (e.g., language, norms, customs, beliefs) context unique to each school. The macrosystem can be influential in the processes of daily school practice, particularly on how schools orient their priorities and goals. The macrosystem layer may influence a student's sense of belonging, although further research is needed to substantiate this claim. One example for this assertion can be seen in Australia, where the use of NAPLAN testing has been controversial and intertwined with debates around teacher effectiveness and performance pay. A teacher's ability to implement a curriculum or bolster the study scores of students is not reported in the literature as a concern for students, yet it can often be a pressing burden for teachers in modern-day schools (Roffey, Reference Roffey2012; Thompson, Reference Thompson2013). This is perhaps a reflection of the pressure by governments and legislation to prioritise academic outcomes at the macrosystem level, above other important factors in the school system. Roffey's (Reference Roffey2012) Wellbeing Australia Survey found that ‘The additional stress on teachers working in unrealistic performance-driven environments has a negative impact on them, which in turn must impact [on the] health and wellbeing of the students in their classrooms’ (p. 4). Increased teacher stress may affect the student-teacher relationship found to be important for fostering school belonging in this article. The absence of a positive student-teacher relationship may result in a reduction in school belonging. Therefore, schools should be mindful of the effect of government-driven initiatives and data collection and the effect this may have on the other socio-ecological layers common to schools.
Unless government bodies become aware of the growing pressure on schools and teachers from over-prioritising academic outcomes, schools may be reluctant to implement positive, proactive interventions related to school belonging or other areas (e.g., coping, resiliency, positive psychology) due to an already overcrowded curriculum (Thompson, Reference Thompson2013). Government bodies concerned with schools should therefore ensure that school belonging (and wellbeing more generally) is prioritised in major sources of information disseminated about schools; for example, including a school belonging measure on the My School websiteFootnote 2 . How students perceive their sense of belonging to their school may be information parents wish to seek about a school, in addition to academic scores. This is particularly relevant for addressing school drop-out rates and student retention at school. Given that school life generally encompasses a diverse range of outcomes and experiences for students, it seems reasonable to argue that a school's educational practices should not be reduced to a set of standardised scores based on one element of the school's performance (Hardy & Boyle, 2012). At the school level, schools must be mindful of these macrosystem level influences from government reform and policy. It is paramount that schools set realistic and inclusive expectations for academic outcomes for their students, while being mindful of the needs of teachers (Roffey, Reference Roffey2012).
Strengths and Limitations of the Framework
The socio-ecological framework of school belonging is based on empirical evidence derived from past literature. The framework is designed as a comprehensive way for schools to foster school belonging. While the framework itself has been developed from peer-reviewed empirical studies, the inclusion of mainly correlational findings means that the direction of the relationship between the themes found to be strongly correlated with school belonging require further analysis. An important caveat of the framework, therefore, is that the influence of themes associated with school belonging cannot be regarded as causal.
Future Research
The framework and suggested evidence-based school practices would be strengthened if they were tested or evaluated using other methods of research. For example, a case study would refine the understanding of how context affects: (a) what practices are implemented, (b) how the practices are implemented, and (c) the success of the practices. A deeper understanding of the evidence-based socio-ecological framework and accompanying school practices would be gained by investigating the experiences, values, and preferences of school leaders, educators, students, and school psychologists (Dollaghan, Reference Dollaghan2004). Further research should aim to use longitudinal designs with objective measures (e.g., observation) for a more detailed understanding of school belonging.
Questions also remain about how school belonging may differ within specific populations. How does the framework apply to young people who do not belong? How does the framework apply to minority groups? While it is clear that social support is essential to improve belonging among students, this appears to be even more salient for minority groups; for example, individuals of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, persons with disabilities (McMahon et al., Reference McMahon, Parnes, Keys and Viola2008), and students who identify themselves as having GLBTQI orientation (Aerts, Van Houtte, Dewaele, Cox, & Vincke, Reference Aerts, Van Houtte, Dewaele, Cox and Vincke2012). For these students, the acceptance of their peers, teachers, and parents has been found to be an important variable in developing prosocial behaviour and a positive attitude towards school (Galliher, Rostosky, & Hughes, Reference Galliher, Rostosky and Hughes2004). Assessing the socio-ecological framework of school belonging's usefulness for specific populations can be examined by future research. Further investigation of the relationship between the broader school community, neighbourhoods, and extended families on the perceived sense of belonging by young people may yield more information on how school belonging can be fostered through a whole-school approach.
Empirical evaluation of the framework in different samples would allow identification of the direction of the relationships of the various individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem levels with school belonging, thus creating a clearly identified pathway for fostering this construct (e.g., what layers are interdependent, how are they weighted, and what combinations are especially important for school belonging to occur?). Therefore, further research is needed to empirically validate the framework and associated evidence-based school practices and further understand the importance of school belonging and how to increase and/or maintain it in secondary school settings.
Conclusions
This article presented a new socio-ecological framework of school belonging using an ecologically oriented school perspective. The socio-ecological framework of school belonging, in its present form, extends Bronfenbrenner's (Reference Bronfenbrenner1979) ecological framework for human development and represents school belonging as a multidimensional construct. Schools may be better equipped to prioritise school belonging more effectively if they have the appropriate and accessible resources by which they could base interventions on fostering and maintaining school belonging at multiple levels. Therefore, the socio-ecological framework of school belonging aims to bridge research and practice through equipping schools with evidence-based information on how school belonging can be increased or maintained.
Financial Support
This work did not receive financial support.
Conflict of Interest
None.
Ethical Standards
This review did not involve human and/or animal experimentation.
