School belonging is a unique multifaceted construct that relates to a student’s sense of affiliation to their school (Allen et al. 2018). Goodenow and Grady (1993) described school belonging to be the “the extent to which students feel personally accepted, respected, included, and supported by others in the school social environment” (p. 61). This includes how students feel about themselves; their sense of importance, meaning, and value to their school (Arslan and Duru 2017). There are a number of variables that have been found to influence one’s sense of school belonging, including individual-, relationship-, and school-level factors (Allen et al. 2016). Put simply, school belonging is about a student’s sense of belonging to their school within a broader school social system. Several studies have shown that the greater one’s sense of school belonging is, the greater their academic functioning and wellbeing. Further, students with high sense of belonging exhibit fewer internalizing and externalizing behaviours (Allen et al. 2017; Anderman 2003; Goodenow and Grady 1993; Pittman and Richmond 2007).

The need to belong is considered theoretically to be a basic need (Bowlby 1969, 1973; Cohen 1982, 1985; Epstein 1992; Glasser 1986; Lee 1973; Maslow 1968, 1971) and a fundamental human motivator; and thus, all individuals, irrespective of age, are considered to be innately driven to find belongingness and maintain it (Baumeister and Leary 1995). Schools offer unique multi-systemic opportunities to belonging for young people (Bronfenbrenner 1979). The examination of school belonging is thus critical due to concerns that fewer students around the world are feeling a sense of belonging to their school (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2017). There has been a drastic increase in feelings of loneliness among adolescents and adults (Australian Psychological Society 2018) and researchers are looking towards interventions that increase a sense of belonging, including school belonging, to provide proactive and preventative services (Allen 2019; Lim et al. 2019). Further, there is compelling evidence showing that a sense of school belonging can help prevent anxiety and depression (Benner et al. 2017; Shochet et al. 2007), boost academic engagement and motivation (Kiefer et al. 2015), increase resilience (Scarf et al. 2016) and gratitude (Zhang et al. 2018), improve sleep (Huynh and Gillen-O’Neel 2016), and increase self-esteem (Begen and Turner-Cobb 2015; Zhang et al. 2018). A sense of school belonging has also been shown to decrease incidences of bullying (Wang and Fredricks 2014; Williams et al. 2018; Wilson and Elliott 2003), misconduct (Demanet and Van Houtte 2012; Olcoń et al. 2017), school dropout rates (Catalano et al. 2004; Lamote et al. 2013) and truancy (Dukynaitė and Dudaitė 2017).

Research focusing on belonging within a secondary school context is vital, given that adolescence is a time of major personal and social change, and a point when mental illnesses and low wellbeing can arise (Allen and McKenzie 2015). However, the majority of research investigating these factors has done so using cross-sectional designs and analysis focusing on bivariate variables. The current study attempts to address this gap in the research by employing a short-term longitudinal design to identify whether there are causal relationships between school belonging, mental health indicators and wellbeing. Data were gathered from secondary school students in Turkey at two time points, using measures that examined school belonging, internalizing and externalizing problems, and life satisfaction. The results of the correlational analyses and structural equation modelling are discussed, and recommendations for practice are provided. It is expected that the findings of this research will highlight the need for school belonging interventions to decrease current and future mental health problems and improve wellbeing.

1 Literature Review

1.1 School Belonging and Wellbeing

Wellbeing relates to positive affect and functioning and is usually associated with factors such as life satisfaction, quality of life, optimism, and future orientation (Jose et al. 2012). O’Rourke and Cooper (2010) found that markers of wellbeing and happiness in children included belonging alongside optimism and friendship. Thus, wellbeing is integral to a positive school life and a direct outcome of belonging (Anderman 2002; Arslan 2018a). For example, a study by Jose et al. (2012) found that there was a reciprocal relationship between school connectedness and wellbeing and that students from a sample of 1774 10- to 15-year-old who reported high levels of school belonging were also more likely to report high levels of wellbeing. In the study, life satisfaction, confidence, positive affect, and future aspirations all had positive effects. Other studies have also supported these outcomes demonstrating a positive correlation between school belonging and happiness (O’Rourke and Cooper 2010; Sharma and Malhotra 2010), psychological adjustment (Law et al. 2013), and self-esteem (Nutbrown and Clough 2009). Several research studies have also found a positive association between school belonging and wellbeing within various minority groups including refugees (Correa-Velez et al. 2010), people who identify as GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender) (Mayock et al. 2008), and African American students (Booker 2006) As such, schools would greatly benefit from implementing policies and practices concerned with promoting student bonding with their school.

1.2 School Belonging and Mental Health

Students’ psychological and emotional wellbeing has become an increasing priority in schools (Allen and McKenzie 2015; Thompson et al. 2000). Mental health problems affect 10 to 20% of all children and adolescents with the average age of onset occurring at age 14 (World Health Organization 2013). Allen et al. (2018) used meta-analytical methods to investigate school belonging and mental health in 51 studies (N =.

67,378). They found that high anxiety, stressors, mental illness, and negative effects can reduce a student’s perceived sense of school belonging, thus suggesting a reciprocal relationship between mental health problems and school belonging, however the analysis was limited through the use of correlational outcomes which cannot be regarded as causal. Therefore, the direction of the relationship between school belonging and mental health cannot be determined beyond the strength of the correlation for this particular study. Despite this, the literature clearly signals that anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation are linked to a low sense of school belonging (Arslan and Allen 2020; Arslan and Renshaw 2018; McMahon et al. 2008; Moody and Bearman 2004; Shochet et al. 2007). However, the causal and longitudinal effects of having a low sense of school belonging is still unclear. A high sense of school belonging, on the other hand, is related to lower levels of depression (Anderman 2002; Shochet et al. 2006), and social resources and social support play important roles in reducing and reversing the effects of social stressors (McMahon et al. 2008).

Shochet et al. (2011) explored the interaction between school belonging and mental health problems through a multi-factorial approach using the Psychological Sense of School Membership Scale (PSSM; Goodenow and Grady 1993) to investigate the three factors of caring relations, acceptance, and rejection alongside a childhood depression inventory. The findings indicated that each of the PSSM scale factors positively predicted initial negative affect in student participants, as well as future negative affect. That is, all three factors predicted future negative affective problems. For the sample of 504 Australian Year 7 and 8 students, this accounted for 8% and 13% of the variance towards negative affect for boys and girls, respectively. The authors note that the study only provides a limited understanding between the reciprocal exchange between negative affect and school belonging, but emphasizes that school belonging should be viewed as a multifactorial construct that has important implications for mental health promotion in schools (Shochet et al. 2011). Several research studies have revealed a significant association between school belonging and mental health, specifically with regard to internalizing (i.e. depression and anxiety) and externalizing (i.e. substance use, delinquency, and suicidal tendencies) behaviours (Arslan 2017; Arslan and Renshaw 2018; Bond et al. 2007; Cruwys et al. 2013; Duru and Arslan 2014; McMahon et al. 2008; Marraccini & Brier, 2017; Napoli et al. 2003; Pittman and Richmond 2007; Shochet et al. 2011; Wilkinson-Lee et al. 2011). Arslan and Tanhan (2019) for example, reported that school belonging was a significant predictor of youth emotional and behavioral problems and school-based outcomes (e.g., academic efficacy, joy of learning, academic satisfaction). These results suggest that school belonging provides a powerful resource in promoting student adjustment and wellbeing.

2 The Present Study

The education system in Turkey consists of primary, secondary and high (or upper secondary) school. After high school, individuals can attend higher education if they pass admission exams (Ministry of National Education 2018). Secondary school settings offer meaningful opportunities for belongingness, and the concept of school belonging holds great importance for educational policy, practices, and approaches. Given that a sense of belonging is a significant protective factor during the developmental stages of adolescence, research exploring the implications for a sense of belonging in schools is essential. Much of the research investigating the relationship between school belonging, wellbeing and mental health problems have studied the bivariate relationship between different variables. For example, most studies report a correlation coefficient (see Allen et al. 2018 for an overview), which can only be used to hypothesize causal inferences rather than providing conclusive evidence regarding causation (Thompson et al. 2005). However, there is little research studying the benefits of school belonging over time.

The goal of the current study was to examine the cross-sectional and longitudinal association between students’ sense of belonging at school, mental health, and wellbeing indicators (i.e., internalizing and externalizing problems, life satisfaction). This study was guided by several hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that having low levels of school belonging would predict mental health problems at Time 2, and that this relationship would be mediated by student mental health and wellbeing indicators at Time 1. Second, we hypothesized that school belonging factors (i.e., high levels of social exclusion and low levels of inclusion) would predict mental health problems at Time 2, and that this relationship would be mediated by student mental health and wellbeing indicators at Time 1. More specifically, we expected that school belonging and each of its factors would predict mental health problems at both time points, with lower levels of social inclusion and higher levels of social exclusion being associated with greater internalizing and externalizing problems, and lower life satisfaction. Additionally, we proposed that life satisfaction would mediate the association between school belonging at Time1 and internalizing and externalizing problems at Time 2.

3 Method

3.1 Participants

Participants of this study included 402 students (52.2% female and 47.8% male), ranging in age between 10 and 15 years [M = 12.18, SD = 1.03]), from two public secondary schools located in an urban city of Turkey. Using the short-term longitudinal structure, data was gathered at two timepoints: the first was in late September and early October of 2018 (hereafter referred to as “Time 1”), and the second was in late May and early June of 2019 (hereafter referred to as “Time 2”). All students who participated in Time 1 were invited to participate in Time 2, and almost all did so (396 of 402; 50.3% female and 49.7% male, ranging in age from 10 to 15 years [M = 12.63, SD = .95]). After missing data were removed, the final sample included 301 students (54.2% female and 48.8% male, ranging in age from 10 to 14 years [M = 12.11, SD = 1.00]).

3.2 Procedure

Students from two public secondary schools in an urban city in Turkey were invited to participate in the study. A paper-and-pencil survey was first created using the demographic variable items and the study measures. Before administering the survey, consent forms were presented to the students who volunteered to participate in the study. The consent forms identified the aims of the study and informed the participants that their responses will be kept confidential and will only be used for the purpose of the study. Informed parental consent and student assent were obtained from approximately 60% of the total sampling pool. Prior to the actual implementation, the present study was approved by the Ministry of National Education ethical review board regarding research with human subjects. The survey was distributed during class time, and the students were given approximately 30 min to complete the survey.

3.3 Measures

School Belonging

Students’ school belonging was measured using the School Belongingness Scale (SBS; Arslan and Duru 2017). The SBS is a 10-item self-report instrument developed to measure the sense of belonging at school of Turkish students (e.g., “I feel that I am accepted by other people at school”, “I can really be myself in this school”). The scale has two subscales, the Social Exclusion Scale (SES) and the Social Inclusion Scale (SIS), each of which is measured by five items. All items are scored using a four-point Likert type scale, ranging from almost never (1) to almost always (4), and after reversing the SES items, higher scores reflect a high level of sense of belonging at school. Previous studies indicated that the scales had strong internal (α = .86) and latent construct (H = .78) reliability coefficients with Turkish adolescents (Arslan 2019a; Arslan and Duru 2017). Internal reliability coefficients of the scale with the present sample was adequate (see Table 1).

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics
Full size table

Internalizing Problems

The Youth Internalizing Behavior Screener (YIBS; Arslan 2019b) was used to assess the emotional problems of youths. The YIBS is a 10-item self-report scale developed to measure emotional problems of Turkish youths, and all items are responded using a four-point Likert type scale, ranging from almost never = 1 to almost always = 4 (e.g., “I feel depressed and pessimistic”, “I have difficulty in relaxing and calming down myself”). Research provided evidence supporting the scale’s validity and reliability, with all scales reporting adequate internal (α range = .75–to–.90) and latent construct reliability (H range = .84–.92) for using among Turkish adolescents (Arslan 2019b). In the present study, internal reliability of the scale was adequate (see Table 1).

Externalizing Problems

Students’ externalizing problems was measured using the Youth Externalizing Behavior Screener (YEBS; Arslan 2018b) developed to assess the behavioral problems of youths (e.g., “I often make others angry or annoyed”, “I get distracted easily, I have difficulty in concentrating”). The scale items are scored using four-point Likert type scale (1 = almost never to 4 = almost always). Previous research has provided evidence of the scales’ adequate internal (α range = .72–to–.83) and latent construct (H range = .72–.83) reliability coefficients with Turkish children and adolescents (Arslan 2018b). In the present study, the scale had strong internal reliability coefficients (see Table 1).

Life Satisfaction

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al. 1985) was used to measure students’ cognitive evaluations of their life. The SWLS is a 5-item self-report scale (e.g., “I am satisfied with my life”, “The conditions of my life are excellent”) scoring from strongly agree (7) to strongly disagree (1). Psychometric properties indicated that the internal reliability and test retest coefficients of the SWLS were adequate for Turkish sample (α = .76, r = .85; Köker 1991). Internal reliability of the scale in this study was adequate (see Table 1).

3.4 Data Analyses

Following the initial review, data from 95 participants were excluded because of non-random missing responses, poorly completed surveys (n = 5), or missing ID (n = 79) numbers. Missing value analysis was used to establish whether the missing data was systematically at random or not across the variables (Tabachnick and Fidell 2013), indicating that Little’s Missing Completely at Random (MCAR) test was significant (p < .001). Therefore, data from 11 participants were excluded because of non-random missing responses. Prior to testing the structural equation models, descriptive statistics, analysis assumptions, and correlation analysis were performed. Kurtosis and skewness scores were used to test normality assumption (Curran et al. 1996). Correlation analysis was then conducted to examine the associations of school belonging and mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Next, structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed to investigate the predictive effect of school belonging on youth outcomes. Results of the SEM were assessed using data-model fit statistics and their cut-off points: comparative fit index (CFI) ≥ .90 = adequate and ≥ .95 = close data-model fit, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ≤ .10 = acceptable, ≤ .08 = adequate, and ≤ .05 = good data-model fit (Hooper et al. 2008; Hu and Bentler 1999; Kline 2015). With regard to Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), values ≥ .80 are considered acceptable fit, while scores values ≥ .95 are considered good fit (Hooper et al. 2008). Findings from the SEM were also interpreted using the squared-multiple correlations (R2), with traditional decision rules: .01–.059 = small, .06–.139 = moderate, ≥ .14 = large (Cohen 1988). All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS and AMOS version 24.

4 Results

4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations

Prior to examining the predictive effect of school belonging on youth outcomes, descriptive statistics and correlation analysis were conducted. Findings from descriptive statistics indicated that skewness and kurtosis scores of the variables ranged from −.65 to 1.88, suggesting that all variables had relatively normal distribution. Internal reliability coefficients of the variables were adequate–to–strong (Time 1 α range = .73–to–88; Time 2 α range = .72–to–86) (see Table 1). Descriptive statistics for Time 1 and Time 2 school belonging, life satisfaction, and mental health indicators are presented in Table 1.

Bivariate (Pearson) correlation analysis was then conducted to investigate the association between school belonging, youth wellbeing and mental health outcomes. Results of these analyses revealed that school belonging (T1) was negatively correlated with youth externalizing (Time 1 r = −.27, Time 2 r = −.23, p < .001) and internalizing problems (Time 1 r = −.47, Time 2 r = −.35, p < .001) and positively associated with youth life satisfaction (Time 2 r = .39, p < .001). Additionally, there were significant and negative associations between life satisfaction and internalizing (Time 1 r = −.30, Time 2 r = −.48, p < .001) and externalizing problems (Time 1 r = −.21, Time 2 r = −.31, p < .001). Similarly, school belonging factors (i.e., social inclusion and exclusion) were significantly correlated with youth mental health and wellbeing indicators. Bivariate correlations between variables are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Intercorrelation Results
Full size table

4.2 School Belonging and Youth Outcomes

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was conducted to examine the predictive effect of school belonging on mental health and wellbeing indicators at Time 2 by the mediating role of student mental health indicators at Time 1. Findings of the SEM provides good data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 7.31, df = 4, p = .12, TLI = .98 CFI = .99, RMSEA [95% CI] = .053 [.00, .12]). After excluding non-significant paths from the model, the outcomes yielded better data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 7.99, df = 6, p = .23, TLI = .99, CFI = .99, RMSEA [95% CI] = .033 [.00, .08]).

Standardized regression estimates showed that school belonging was a significant predictor of externalizing (β = −.27, p < .001) and internalizing problems (β = −.48, p < .001) at Time 1. Additionally, school belonging significantly predicted youth life satisfaction (T2; β = .40, p < .001). Further outcomes showed that school belonging predicted externalizing (β = .53, p < .001) and internalizing problems (β = .36, p < .001) at Time 2, and there was a mediating effect of internalizing and externalizing problems at Time 1. After including the mental health problems (T1) as mediators in the model, school belonging did not significantly predict internalizing (β = −.04, p > .05 [before entering the mediators β = −.35]) and externalizing problems (β = −.01, p > .05 [before entering the mediators β = −.23]) at Time 2. Life satisfaction (T2) also mediated the effect of school belonging on youth internalizing (T2; β = −.37, p < .001) and externalizing problems (T2; β = −.20, p < .001), see Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Standardized estimates of impacts of school belonging on youth outcomes Note. Models contain data from both Time 1 (T1) and Time 2 (T2). *p < .05, **p < .001. Paths from school belonging at Time 1 to internalizing and externalizing problems at Time 2 are non-significant. SE = Social exclusion, SI = Social inclusion

Full size image

4.3 School Belonging Factors and Youth Outcomes

Given the factor structures of school belonging, two structural equation models were performed to test school belonging factors, social inclusion and exclusion, on student mental health and wellbeing indicators. The social inclusion model indicated adequate data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 14.10, df = 4, p = .01, TLI = .91, CFI = .98, SRMR = .066, RMSEA [90% CI] = .092 [.04, .13]). Similar to previous analyses, the non-significant paths were excluded from the model and the SEM was re-run, indicating better data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 14.60, df = 6, p = .02, TLI = .95, CFI = .99, RMSEA [90% CI] = .069 [.02, .11]). Standardized regression coefficients showed that social inclusion significantly predicted internalizing (T1; β = −.33, p < .001) and externalizing problems (T1; β = −.18, p < .001) and life satisfaction (T2; β = .36, p < .001). Social inclusion was indirectly associated with internalizing (T2; β = .37, p < .001) and externalizing problems (T2; β = .53, p < .001) by the mediating effect of mental health indicators at Time 1. Additionally, life satisfaction (T2) mediated the association between social inclusion (T1) and externalizing (T2; β = −.19, p < .001) and internalizing problems (T2; β = −.38, p < .001).

Next, the SEM was conducted to examine the impacts of social exclusion on youth mental health and wellbeing indicators. The results provided acceptable data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 20.36, df = 4, p = .00, TLI = .85, CFI = .97, RMSEA [90% CI] = .11 [.07, .15]). After exclusion of non-significant paths from the model, the outcomes yielded better data–model fit statistics (χ2 = 23.98, df = 6, p = .00, TLI = .90, CFI = .97, RMSEA [95% CI] = .10 [.06, .14]). Standardized regression results showed that social exclusion significantly predicted internalizing (T1; β = .38, p < .001) and externalizing problems (T1; β = .29, p < .001) and life satisfaction (T2; β = −.19, p < .001). Social exclusion indirectly predicted internalizing (T2; β = .38, p < .001) and externalizing problems (T2; β = .53, p < .001) by the mediating effect of mental health indicators at Time 1. Moreover, life satisfaction (T2) mediated the association between social exclusion (T1) and externalizing (T2; β = −.20, p < .001) and internalizing problems (T2; β = −.39, p < .001). Standardized estimates of the hypothesized models demonstrating the associations between school belonging, and mental health and wellbeing indicators are presented in Fig. 1.

5 Discussion

The present study used a longitudinal design to explore the predictive effect of school belonging and its factors (i.e., social inclusion and exclusion) on mental health and wellbeing indicators (i.e., internalizing and externalizing problems, life satisfaction) in secondary school students. The study sought to further inform school belonging–based interventions that target internalizing and externalizing difficulties and wellbeing.

The first hypothesis was that low school belonging would predict mental health problems at Time 2, and that this relationship would be mediated by student mental health and wellbeing indicators. The results of the study supported this hypothesis as school belonging was found to be a significant predictor of youth externalizing and internalizing problems and life satisfaction, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. School belonging also predicted mental health problems (T2) by the mediating effect of externalizing and internalizing problems at Time 1 and life satisfaction at Time 2. The findings of this study suggest that fostering higher levels of school belonging may help protect young people against mental health problems (Arslan 2018a; McMahon et al. 2008; Shochet et al. 2011). These results add weight to the argument put forward by Allen et al. (2018) that the nature of the relationship between school belonging and mental health is reciprocal. They also suggest that the implementation of school belonging promoting strategies may decrease current and future mental health problems in young people. Given the increasing incidence of mental health issues among adolescents (Thompson et al. 2000), such information is vital and timely.

A second hypothesis of this study was that school belonging factors (i.e., high levels of social exclusion and low levels of inclusion) would predict mental health problems at Time 2, and that this relationship would be mediated by student mental health and wellbeing indicators at Time 1. This hypothesis was also supported as the results revealed that each of the school belonging factors predicted internalizing and externalizing problems at both Time 1 and 2, with lower levels of social inclusion and higher levels of social exclusion being associated with greater internalizing and externalizing problems and lower life satisfaction. Specifically, social inclusion more strongly predicted youth life satisfaction, while social exclusion was found to be a strong predictor of internalizing and externalizing problems. These findings support the notion that school belonging is a multifactorial construct (Arslan and Duru 2017; Shochet et al. 2011), and indicate that there is a strong need for school-based interventions aimed at preventing and reducing internalizing and externalizing symptoms, and promoting wellbeing in adolescents. McMahon et al. (2008) suggest that students face social stressors at schools (e.g., peer rejection, peer victimization, and peer harassment), which can correlate with psychological problems such as increased levels of depression. In light of school stressors and their potential effect on school belonging, environmental structures within schools, such as those concerning safety, discipline, and fairness need to be considered. Given the need-to-belong model, inclusion experiences increase positive outcomes, whereas exclusion is strongly associated with negative experiences, such as depression, loneliness, and negative affect (Baumeister and Leary 1995). Arslan (2017) found that social exclusion at school strongly predicted youth mental health problems and stated the importance of promoting school-based inclusive experiences and enabling students to explore ways to improve the feelings of belongingness (Arslan 2017; Arslan and Allen 2020; Baumeister 2012).

A third hypothesis was that life satisfaction would mediate the association between school belonging at Time1 and internalizing and externalizing problems at Time 2. This hypothesis was also supported as the outcomes revealed that life satisfaction mediated the association between school belonging factors (T1) and internalizing and externalizing problems (T2). Compared to externalizing problems, life satisfaction more strongly predicted internalizing problems. Life satisfaction is the cognitive assessment of one’s life as a whole (Diener et al. 1985; Yaghoobzadeh et al. 2018) and low life satisfaction has been found to be a risk factor for a variety of psychosocial problems such as depression, somatization, and aggression (Gilman and Huebner 2006; Suldo and Huebner 2006). Consistent with the results of this study, Suldo and Huebner (2006) showed that life satisfaction mediated the association between authoritative parenting and adolescent internalizing and externalizing behavior. Park (2004) suggests this may be because life satisfaction potentially mitigates negative adolescent behavioral outcomes. Life satisfaction was also found to be a protective factor for mental health during adolescence (Suldo and Huebner 2004a). Consistent with cognitive-behavioral model, life satisfaction serves as a significant cognitive mechanism, clarifying the association between school experiences, and adolescent emotional and behavioral behaviors (McKnight et al. 2002; Suldo and Huebner 2004a). Therefore, life satisfaction is not only an epiphenomenon, but it is also an important cognitive variable that has impacts on adolescent mental health (Suldo and Huebner 2004b).

5.1 Limitations

Although this longitudinal study extends the findings of previous cross-sectional studies, claims of causation should be treated carefully as there is a possibility that the results may have been influenced by extraneous variables. Further replication of these results using experimental designs is therefore recommended. In addition, this study focused on a relatively small sample of students from two secondary schools in urban Turkey. Future research should therefore aim to conduct similar studies with larger samples, and in cross-cultural contexts.

5.2 Implications

Irrespective of the limitations of the study, the current findings provide additional evidence for the importance of school belonging in relation to youth externalizing and internalizing problems, and life satisfaction, holding important implications for theory building and conceptual understandings of wellbeing and belonging in secondary school children. The findings also have applied implications for schools in respect to mental health promotion, and the early identification of students with mental health concerns by school staff members. The results of this study strongly indicate that secondary schools in particular should be working to implement mental health promotion activities and interventions. Brief interventions that build belonging can be implemented with very little cost and effort, and be absorbed into the current practices and day-to-day activities in school (Booker 2006; Craggs and Kelly 2018; Diebel et al. 2016). For example, staff members could be educated to identify early warning signs of mental illness, trained in mental health first aid, and informed of the appropriate referral and response pathways for students at risk. Furthermore, students could be encouraged to seek help when problems arise, and taught how to identify unhealthy behaviors in peers and access key staff members to seek support when needed. Given the outcomes of this study, school belonging-based interventions would provide a powerful resource in improving youth wellbeing and mental health. Specifically, school belonging-based intervention and prevention strategies could be developed to help students with emotional and behavioral problems. Further, the study indicated that students who reported greater social inclusion had both cross-sectionally and longitudinally less emotional and behavioral problems, as well as higher subjective wellbeing than those who experienced higher social exclusion. These results suggest that there is a need to develop more comprehensive prevention and intervention strategies for supporting youth mental health and wellbeing (Arslan 2020; Shochet et al. 2011) and promoting inclusive experiences at school (Baumeister 2012). For example, mental health providers could design prevention and intervention programs for youths who are poorly included or excluded at school, and these programs could focus on positive interpersonal experiences and skills (e.g., positive student-teacher relationships, social activities) to improve the inclusive school experiences and support the resources that may help deal with exclusion (Arslan 2020). Taken together, findings of this study suggest the importance of school belonging-based preventions and interventions promoting youth mental health and wellbeing in school settings.

5.3 Future Research and Looking Forward

Increasingly, the scholarly literature stresses the importance of individual characteristics that students can grow and develop to increase their sense of school belonging (Allen et al. 2017). Variables like social and emotional competencies, and self-esteem, self-efficacy, and self-sufficiency are strongly associated with school belonging (Allen et al. 2018; Allen et al. 2017). Strategies that build agency in young people show great promise. Over the last decade, schools have become increasingly aware of the importance of personal characteristics of students in respect to a student’s sense of school belonging (Roffey 2011; Waters et al. 2010). However, further work is needed to empirically validate social and emotional curricula in a way that schools may harness it to best address school belonging in students.

6 Conclusion

Increasing empirical research highlights the importance of school belonging in protecting young people against mental health disorders, such as stress, anxiety and depression. The current research contributes to this growing body of literature and suggests that a sense of school belonging is a vital component to a student’s success at school and that urgent attention is needed to prioritize it.