Co-designing Dance for Adolescent Wellbeing: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study in English Secondary Schools

Background: Adolescents in England face growing mental health challenges, including increased rates of loneliness and decreased access to timely support. Dance is a holistically beneficial activity with known benefits for physical, mental and social health. This pilot study investigated whether co-designed dance interventions could improve wellbeing among young people in school settings. Methods: This mixed-methods pilot study involved two London-based secondary schools. Students helped shape the format of dance sessions using co-design methodology. A four-week dance programme was delivered to Year 8 and 9 pupils (aged 13-14). Mental wellbeing (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale, WEMWBS), loneliness (UCLA 3-item scale), engagement with school wellbeing support and enthusiasm for dance (Net Promoter Score, NPS) were assessed pre- and post-intervention. Qualitative feedback was collected from participants. Results: Twenty-eight pupils took part; six joined co-design. Mean attendance was 3.7 of 4 sessions. Matched pre-post data were available for WEMWBS (n = 21), UCLA-3 (n = 20) and NPS (n = 10). Acceptability improved: mean NPS rose from 6.7 to 8.0 (Wilcoxon Z = −2.266, P = .023). Qualitative data highlighted valued elements: skilled instructors, familiar choreography, peer connection, choice, playfulness, and low-pressure sharing. Exploratory outcomes showed no group-level change in wellbeing or loneliness (WEMWBS 53.9 ± 7.5 to 53.6 ± 13.2, t (20) = 0.087, P = .931; UCLA-3 4.75 ± 1.55 to 4.30 ± 1.38, t (19) = 1.229, P = .234), though several individuals moved from low-wellbeing or “lonely” categories. Conclusion: A co-designed dance intervention was feasible to deliver in schools, achieved high session attendance and improved acceptability of dance. Group-level changes in wellbeing and loneliness were not detected in this short pilot, but individual gains and strong engagement support progression to a larger, longer evaluation with pre-specified feasibility thresholds and refined implementation guidance.