Conference Agenda

The purpose of this systematic literature review is to provide a synthesis on the ways in which teachers can support a functional classroom peer ecology as part of their pedagogical practices. Research questions are following:

1. How can teachers promote a functional classroom peer ecology with students aged 7–16?
2. What kind of impacts do different teacher actions have on the classroom peer ecology?
3. How are the included pedagogical practices distributed across teaching dimensions, and which dimensions require further research?

Drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system theory, we use the term classroom peer ecology to describe the social environment of the classroom where peers interact and influence each other (Bronfenbrenner 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2007; see also Lewin, 1935; Vygotsky, 1978).

There is strong empirical research evidence that peers play an important role in students’ academic achievement (Ozyildirim & Karadağ, 2024; Wentzel et al., 2021), learning motivation (Kilday & Ryan, 2022; Kindermann, 2016), and school engagement (Ulmanen et al., 2014; Weyns et al., 2018). Positive peer relations play a crucial role also in enhancing students' mental well-being, boosting their resilience, self-worth, and overall life satisfaction (Alsarrani et al., 2022). Students themselves identify peers as the most important determinant of their school engagement, together with teachers (Gowing, 2019).

Unfortunately, peer interactions do not automatically result in positive outcomes. Loneliness, being bullied, and experiences of exclusion have serious consequences for students. They may result in disengagement from school (Haugan et al., 2019; Jefferson et al., 2023) and mental health problems such as depression, low self-esteem, and suicidal ideation (Gürcan et al. 2023; Zahrani, 2024). Peers can also affect student learning and academic performance negatively. This is particularly evident when students seek approval from peers who exhibit low engagement with school-related activities or when the prevailing classroom culture undermines the value of academic success (Boehnke, 2008). According to these studies the classroom peer ecology characterised high by trust, prosocial behaviours and mutual support, and low status hierarchy and conflict, best supports students´ wellbeing and learning.

Students' experiences of how respectful and friendly peer interaction is shown to vary between classes, even within the same school. Much of the variation is explained by teachers' actions in the classroom – what they do in the classroom and how they interact with their students (Endedijk, 2022; Hughes, 2012; Kilday & Ryan, 2022; Muñoz-Hurtado, 2018).

There has been no systematic review that has provided a synthesis of the empirical evidence on the effective means through which teachers can cultivate a functional classroom peer ecology. We aim to bridge this gap in the literature.

Students well-being has received increasing attention in educational research (OECD, 2023; Rathmann & Hurrelmann, 2018). Results indicate that student well-being is closely associated with greater cognitive resources and higher levels of learning motivation (Hascher et al., 2018; OECD, 2017).

Students well-being is defined as an individual state involving positive and negative emotions and cognitions related to the school context and is commonly conceptualized as a multidimensional construct (Borgonovi & Pál, 2016). This paper adopts Hascher’s six-component model as its conceptual framework (2012). Specifically, the six components include: three positive dimensions – positive attitudes toward school, enjoyment in school, and positive academic self-concept, and three negative dimensions – worries in school, physical complaints in school, and social problems in school (Hascher & Mori, 2024).

In order to promote students well-being, it is essential to identify the factors that influence it. By now, relatively robust evidence exists on the association between school well-being and social factors, such as relationships with teachers or classmates (Poulou, 2020; Varela et al., 2019).

Compared to social factors, the effects of teaching quality on students well-being remain comparatively underexplored. Although research in this area remains limited, the available evidence consistently indicates that high-quality instruction is linked to enhanced student well-being (Gysin, 2018; Ott, 2021; 2024).

According to Klieme (2019), teaching quality can be classified into three core dimensions: classroom management, constructive support, and cognitive activation. Research indicates that the provision of constructive support positively influences students well-being (Grommé et al., 2023; Leighton et al., 2016). A similar relationship has been found for high cognitive activation in the classroom (Gysin, 2018; Ott, 2021; 2024).

While previous research has demonstrated associations between independent teaching quality dimensions and specific aspects of student well-being, it remains unclear how all three dimensions of teaching quality interact with the six components of students well-being. Moreover, teaching quality exhibits greater similarity within classes than between classes. Therefore, analyses should take into account the nested structure of students within classes.The present study addresses the following research question: How are the three dimensions of teaching quality (classroom management, constructive support, and cognitive activation) related to the six components of students well-being – three positive dimensions – positive attitudes toward school, enjoyment in school, and positive academic self-concept, and three negative dimensions – worries in school, physical complaints in school, and social problems in school – while taking into account the effect of class membership?

There is a mental health crisis around the world (APA, 2020). Youth and young adults (ages 12-25) are notably at risk. In adolescence, depression is a leading cause of illness and suicide is the third leading cause of death (WHO, 2020). Most diagnosed mental health conditions begin during this time (Kessler et al., 2007), but recent studies indicate declining mental health and well-being in the general population (Keyes, 2006; Sutcliffe et al., 2023). This is a serious and urgent problem (UNESCO, 2020).

In secondary and post-secondary school, mental health resources are stretched by rising cases of mental illness. For the general population, teachers have become the frontline tasked with promoting mental health, despite limited research-informed pedagogy. There is a need to glean knowledge from all fields that might inform new approaches (Atkins, 2010).

The field of arts education offers promise, with distinct knowledge on the relationship between art, brain, and mind (Csikszentmihalyi & Robinson, 1990; Edwards; 1998; Eisner, 2002; Gardner, 2008; Zeki, 2001). In mental health practices, visual art has been marginalized to creative expression and art therapy (Curry & Kasser, 2005; Haeyen, 2019; Haeyen & Hinz, 2020; Kapitan, 2012; Lee, 2015; Zhang et al., 2015). However, the emergence of transdisciplinary fields, such as neuroaesthetics (Chatterjee & Vartanian, 2014; Vittorio, 2009; Nadal & Pearce, 2011; Pearce et al., 2016), offer brain-based explanations of artistic process that reposition it as a tool for health and well-being (Carew & Magsamen, 2010; Golden, 2024; Magsamen, 2019). Art-making induces positive mental states (Chilton, 2013; Drake et al., 2014; Sandmire et al., 2012), and scholars identify visual-tactile process as a causal mechanism (Curry & Kasser, 2005; Kimport & Robbins, 2012; Monti et al., 2006). Engaging in visual art can induce a flow state, a positive mental state of ultimate engagement (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014; Kapitan, 2012; Lee, 2015). Recently, Martin and Colp (2022) identified vistactivity (visual-tactile process over time) as a trigger for shifting mental states and accessing flow.

Martin & Colp (2022) investigated vistactivity as experiential learning (Kolb 2014) with adults. Using Brain Smoothies® Art-Meds^TM, they measured effects on mental health capacity, finding a statistically significant increase; plus evidence of two, positive mental states elicited by Art-Meds: 1) flow, and 2) mental floating, a perceivable mental shift, activated during vistactivity (Martin & Colp, 2022). Findings support learning through art as an effective pedagogy for learning how to recognize and shift mental states, and to bolster mental resilience.

With such powerful evidence, it was imperative to test the method as promising pedagogy for youth mental health education. This study hypothesized positive effects on mental health capacity; and posed new hypotheses of positive effects on mental well-being, and self-regulation (Bandura, 1991).

Results with post-secondary students were statistically significant, finding increases in mental health capacity (t(31) = -2.79, p < 0.05, d =0.50), and mental well-being (t(31) = -2.48, p < 0.05, d = .44). Results with junior high students (N=190) are anticipated in June, and will include findings on mental health capacity, mental well-being, and results on self-regulation.

Through this work, we contribute new knowledge to the fields of mental health and education with empirical evidence from an aggregate sample of 211 youth: learning through art promotes mental health. Further, we hope to contribute to practice in identifying an evidence-based pedagogy that builds mental health capacity, bolsters well-being, and promotes skills for self-regulation (pending). Thus, we contribute much-needed knowledge for educational theory and practice, especially for teachers seeking pedagogies that promote mental resilience.

In recent years, school wellbeing has progressively become a strategic priority within European educational policies and school development agendas. Wellbeing is increasingly framed as a multidimensional concept encompassing mental, emotional, social and relational dimensions, and as a prerequisite for learning, participation and inclusion. However, despite this conceptual expansion, dominant policy and practice approaches continue to interpret school wellbeing primarily as an individual outcome, to be promoted through targeted interventions aimed at pupils’ resilience, emotional regulation and behavioural adjustment.

This tendency becomes particularly problematic in the current context of poly-crisis, characterised by the entanglement of social, economic, educational, political and cultural crises that deeply affect children, families, schools and local communities. In such conditions, educational inequalities, family vulnerability, social marginalisation and institutional fragmentation increasingly shape students’ opportunities for learning and wellbeing. Consequently, the conceptualisation of school wellbeing as an individual and decontextualised attribute risks obscuring the structural, relational and political dimensions that condition educational experience.

The present contribution aims to critically reframe school wellbeing through a social pedagogy perspective, focusing on the relational and institutional nexus between schools, families and local welfare systems. Drawing on the theoretical traditions of social pedagogy and educational welfare, the paper conceptualises wellbeing as a collective and socially situated educational process, embedded in community relationships, professional practices and policy arrangements.

The central research questions guiding the paper are:

• How can school wellbeing be reconceptualised as a relational and community-based educational process rather than an individual outcome?
• In what ways do family-school-welfare relationships shape the conditions for educational wellbeing in contexts of social and institutional poly-crisis?
• How can social pedagogy contribute to the development of more integrated and educationally grounded wellbeing policies and practices in schools?

The main aim of the paper is to offer a theoretically grounded framework for understanding school wellbeing as a core dimension of educational and social citizenship, situated at the intersection of educational practices, family life and welfare policies. More specifically, the contribution seeks to:

• critically analyse prevailing policy discourses on school wellbeing and health promotion in education;
• highlight the role of family–school relationships as a crucial but under-theorised dimension of wellbeing-oriented educational governance;
• propose a social pedagogical model for rethinking wellbeing as an educational and community responsibility.

The theoretical framework integrates three complementary perspectives.

First, social pedagogy provides a relational and contextual understanding of education, emphasising community, participation, recognition and social justice as central educational values. From this perspective, wellbeing emerges as a process of social inclusion and educational belonging rather than as a psychological condition.

Second, the concept of educational welfare is used to interpret school wellbeing policies as part of broader welfare regimes and governance arrangements that redistribute responsibilities between schools, families and social services.

Third, an ecological and critical approach to education and health promotion is adopted to examine how institutional structures, professional cultures and policy frameworks shape educational practices and opportunities for wellbeing.

By placing family-school-welfare relationships at the centre of the analysis, the paper explicitly addresses the contextual determinants of health and wellbeing education and responds to the growing need for theoretically informed approaches capable of linking school development, community partnerships and policy innovation in times of profound social transformation.