Belonging is moving from the margins of educational debate towards the centre of policy and accountability. The Department for Education’s white paper, Every Child Achieving and Thriving, signals a clear policy direction towards children’s sense of belonging and engagement, with an expectation that every school will monitor this by 2029. Before schools select surveys, set targets and produce dashboards, however, we need to be clearer about what belonging is and what the evidence allows us to claim. The human brain is predisposed to seek belonging and status. This can be particularly powerful for adolescents. They are constantly scanning their surroundings for signals that they fit in, are respected and are accepted. This is sometimes described as “belonging uncertainty” – the doubt that one is fully accepted in a particular social or academic environment. Pupils interpret how others behave and may connect those observations to their own status. This process can become recursive. A pupil who concludes they do not belong may withdraw or underperform, apparently confirming their original belief. Conversely, positive experiences can create a virtuous cycle of participation, success and belonging. As the professional adults in pupils’ lives, we should seek to interrupt negative cycles and strengthen positive ones. But what is the relationship between belonging and attainment? Evidence A recent DfE study found that moving from strongly agreeing to strongly disagreeing with the statement “I belong at my school” was associated with an approximately eight-point reduction in attainment 8, after controlling for prior attainment, demographics and bullying. Other evidence is more qualified. ImpactEd found that secondary pupils in the highest engagement quartile were 10 percentage points less likely to be persistently absent. But this measured wider engagement rather than belonging alone. The National Foundation for Educational Research found an association between belonging and absence. But it was not sustained after controlling for life satisfaction. Belonging therefore matters, but it is neither a single-variable explanation nor a standalone cure for absence and underachievement. It is part of a wider relationship between engagement, wellbeing, participation and attainment, one that school leaders cannot afford to ignore or treat as a bolt-on pastoral initiative. The science of instruction helps explain how pupils learn. Research on belonging helps us understand some of the conditions under which they are willing and able to participate in that learning. A pupil who is physically present but repeatedly experiences confusion, failure or invisibility may not experience genuine belonging. Belonging is partly built through successful participation. This means viewing pedagogy through the lens of belonging. It is not only what we do, but how we do it. High expectations can communicate belief in pupils’ potential. Before a challenging assessment, a teacher might say: “This next bit is going to be difficult. I have planned it this way because I believe you are capable, and I want you to see what you can do.” Checking for understanding can be framed as a way of ensuring that everyone’s thinking matters. Clear explanations and modelling can help pupils experience competence and success rather than repeated failure. Consistent routines can make classrooms more predictable and psychologically safer, reducing some of the uncertainty pupils experience. What school leaders should ask Do pupils believe adults know them and notice their absence? Can they participate in a consistent, psychologically safe environment? Do they experience academic success and see themselves as capable learners? Does every pupil have a trusted adult and meaningful peer connection? Do pupils have authentic opportunities to contribute? Are routines and provision designed so pupils with SEND and other vulnerabilities can participate successfully? Answering these questions requires more than a headline survey percentage. Quantitative measures should be triangulated with differences between year groups and pupil groups, attendance and lateness, suspensions, bullying and safeguarding information, extracurricular participation and pupil interviews. Schools have access to survey tools that measure belonging in different ways and at different levels of detail. But if the response to new policy is simply to administer an annual survey and pursue a target, we will have misunderstood the concept. Measurement should begin a conversation, not complete an accountability exercise.