no man is an island,
the whole of oneself;
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
to riff on 17th John Donne’s poem of the century, ‘No Child is an Island’. At least, this is a central thesis underpinning Brown and his colleague’s 2025 paper in which they outline An approach to school-based wellness programs that improves young people’s relationships with each other, their school, and their wider community.
School-based programs to support children’s well-being are timely given evidence that 1 in 4 young people in England have a potential mental health disorder (NHS England, 2024). This increase in rates of mental health problems has led policy makers to call for the inclusion of mental health support within schools.
However, the determinants of mental health problems are complex and multidimensional, operating across multiple systems within and outside of schools. For example, we know that late childhood and early adolescence are a period of social restructuring in which young people align their identities with their peer group (read Emily’s blog to learn more) and programs that help young people build peer relationships can improve their well-being (Veenstra & Lanninga-Wijn, 2022).
cultural identity – and to the extent that it is embraced or minimized – it may also impact mental health outcomes. In this paper, Brown and colleagues (2025) introduce their ‘Connected Belonging’ modelAn approach to school well-being strategies that places less emphasis on individual skills and highlights the interpersonal identities of young people.
Relationships are important in adolescence, and Brown et al. (2025) The Connected Belonging model places this at the centre.
methods
To introduce and support their model, the authors briefly describe four studies they previously conducted, before outlining how these findings were used to develop the Connected Belongings Model. It is important to note that the model is based primarily on the findings of these four studies, which include:
- a harsh, Large scale review of education policy Provides an overview of current practice, across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
- A Qualitative, photo-narrative study Asking pupils’ views on school-based mental health programs delivered in seven schools in South East England.
- An Australian-based study Evaluating school-based approaches to well-beingWith themes derived from the collaboration of the youth who participated in the interviews.
- One Assessment of youth at risk of dropping out of educationand a Trial of co-designed intervention To support these students
However, Brown and his colleagues also draw on a wide range of literature that confirms their findings.
Result
The Connected Belonging model places the young person and their personal identity at the center of the approach of school-based well-being programmes. This basic component is surrounded by Material, relational And subjective dimension Which can either promote or hinder well-being. This model contrasts markedly with existing approaches to school wellbeing programs which focus on teaching young people skills and competencies, such as demonstrating ‘grit’ in the face of the pressures of their lives.
Rather, the Connected Belonging model takes a more holistic approach to the well-being of youth in schools, by improving relationships with the systems that surround youth and shape them.
So, what are the dimensions of the Connected Belonging model?
- school identityWhich indicates the extent to which a young person feels part of his or her school community. To effectively support young people’s school identity, educational institutions must help young people develop a positive identity within their studies, regardless of learning styles, abilities, abilities and interests.
- cultural identitywhich is young people’s sense of their relationship to their background and culture(s). Schools can play an active role in nurturing this feature of young people’s identity by showing understanding and sensitivity to different practices, beliefs and values, as well as ensuring that they are not discriminated against by staff or students.
- local community identityYoung people are defined as the area in which they live, but outside their immediate home environment. The extent to which schools engage with the local community, such as partnering with community groups or teaching local history, can be both facilitators and barriers to this aspect of young people’s identity.
- keep attachmentwhich, in contrast to the other domains described so far, refers to young people’s ability to identify a physical place or space where they feel safe or feel they belong, and is particularly topical in the context of the decline in ‘third spaces’ (Finlay et al., 2020). Schools themselves can be these places for young people.
- Social identity and intersectional characteristics that reflect that young personThat includes their gender, sexuality, ethnicity, social class, diagnosis, and life experiences (for example, being care-experienced). The role of schools in including all students can reduce the qualitative barriers faced by students from minority backgrounds.
- peer group identityDescribes young people’s connectedness to their peer group, and can be supported by initiatives to reduce harassment such as bullying prevention programmes.
- citizenship identityThis is the extent to which youth identify themselves as national and global citizens. The extent to which schools support youth engagement with national and global issues may influence this area of young people’s identity.
The Connected Belonging model contrasts with existing approaches in schools which focus on ‘grit’.
conclusion
As a model, Connected Belonging places youth at the center of a complex environment. Helping youth navigate these different domains is proposed as a new and effective approach to school-based wellness programs.
However, the Connected Belonging Model proposes that these domains are relevant to all youth, It does not describe the relative importance of these domains and acknowledges that these may vary across young people.. For example, in the third of four studies used to derive this model, Aboriginal youth described their perspectives on identity formation as placing greater emphasis on attachment to nature than UK youth.
Although this approach may support the adaptability of the model to young people in different contexts, it may be challenging to evaluate which components of the model improve well-being, and whether each component contributes equally to changes in well-being.
Schools can foster youth’s relationships with different parts of their identities. This is an approach that schools may consider adopting in relation to wellbeing.
Strengths and limitations
This paper is a comprehensive outline of an innovative approach to school-based well-being. It has remarkable strength Preparing separate bodies of evidence To validate the model, this included a large policy review and qualitative evidence from international sources (including Aboriginal young people who are typically under-represented in studies). This strength means that the evidence has been triangulated across different sources and reduces the likelihood that the model is biased towards a particular context or group of young people. Another benefit is that wellbeing is not seen as limited to schools, but schools play an (important!) role in the complex lives of young people.
However, these powers must be considered in the context of some notable limitations. First, This model is derived from only four studiesDespite there being a vast literature evaluating school-based approaches to mental health and well-being. This relatively narrow focus may miss alternative approaches to school-based mental health, such as those that do not rely on a whole-school approach.
Other than this, No formal method was specified when describing how the findings from these four studies were synthesized to develop the model.which limits reproducibility and does not provide information about the extent to which the model integrated the complete data from these studies.
Next, paper It does not detail how this model can be formally tested against existing approaches to school-based well-being. Description of quantitative or qualitative methods that would provide empirical testing of this model would be helpful in testing whether this model improves student well-being compared to existing approaches.
It would also be interesting to consider the extent to which this model might generalize to other, non-mainstream school settings, such as student referral units, which are settings for students who require additional support due to behavioral issues. This would be an interesting way to find out whether young people with behavioral problems consider these areas important to their well-being.
The Connected Belonging model is based primarily on four studies, and it is not clear in the paper how these findings were synthesized to develop the model.
Implications for practice
The Connected Belonging model offers an interesting alternative approach to supporting young people’s well-being in the school environment and is an important contribution to the literature, given the role schools now play in early intervention and prevention.
However, further testing and research is needed to better understand how this model might fit into different schooling contexts, and its potential to be used in research, policy and practice. To do this, researcher Research could be conducted within and between schools to test the relationship between domain strength and positive mental health outcomes, identifying the strength of effects and which domains appear to be most important in different contexts.
Based on further research findings, policy makers There may be a need to consider moving from narratives focused on individual resilience towards approaches that focus on relationships and identity. However, if this is done, change will need to be informed by engaging with stakeholders including young people, parents, teachers, practitioners and researchers.
At the end, teachers and school staff They may want to consider identifying which domains of identity are encouraged in their settings, and which could be further supported.
Should policy switch from an approach focused on individual resilience to one that puts identity and relationships at the centre? More research is needed to find out.
Statement of Interests
Alex Lloyd – Nobody.
edited by
Dr Nina Higson-Sweeney
Link
primary paper
Ceri Brown, Alison Douthwaite, Michael Donnelly, and Marnie Shay (2025). Connected Belonging: A relational and identity-based approach to the role of schools in promoting child well-being. British Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4112
Other references
Doane, J. (1624). Devotions on emerging occasions.
Finlay, J., Esposito, M., Kim, M. H., Gomez-Lopez, I., and Clark, P. (2019). ‘Third Place’ finish? Exploring the potential consequences for collective health and well-being. health and place, 60102225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.102225
Stapley, E. (2018). Peer influence and risk-taking behavior during adolescence.. Psychic elf.
Veenstra, R., and Lanninga-Wijnen, L. (2022). Peer network study and intervention in adolescence. Current opinion in psychology, 44157-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.09.015
photos
