Can Dance Education Support Students’ Social–Emotional Competence? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background and purpose: Structured dance education combines embodied expression, interpersonal coordination, and guided participation, creating pedagogical opportunities to develop social–emotional competence (SEC). However, prior syntheses have combined educational dance with therapeutic or health-oriented programmes, leaving its pedagogical contribution unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis mapped how SEC has been conceptualised and measured in structured, nonclinical dance education, estimated its average effect, and examined descriptive variation across study and programme characteristics. Methods: Five databases were searched on 18 July 2026. Thirty-eight reports representing 35 independent study families met the review criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 or ROBINS-I. Nine independent families providing direct dance-versus-non-dance comparisons (N = 1,067) entered a REML random-effects meta-analysis with modified Hartung–Knapp inference. Family-level effects avoided double-counting companion reports and correlated outcomes. Results: The evidence spanned all educational stages but varied substantially in SEC domains, measures, dance forms, and comparators; 14 of the 35 families explicitly identified a theoretical or conceptual framework. The primary synthesis showed a positive average effect in favour of dance education (Hedges’ g = 0.43, 95% CI [0.13, 0.73], p = .011). Heterogeneity was moderate to substantial (I² = 64.3%), and the prediction interval indicated meaningful variation across settings (95% PI [−0.32, 1.17]). Alternative outcome-aggregation procedures yielded comparable estimates (g = 0.38–0.40). None of the primary families provided low-risk evidence, and available data did not establish moderation by design, comparator, dance type, duration, or educational stage. Conclusions: Structured dance education may support students’ SEC, although outcomes are likely to depend on how programmes organise movement, interaction, and reflection within particular educational contexts. The synthesis shifts the question from whether dance works in general to which pedagogical features may support particular competencies, for whom, and under what conditions. Impact statement: By separating structured, nonclinical dance education from therapeutic and non-isolable multicomponent evidence and linking companion reports into independent study families, this review provides a pedagogically focused evidence map and pooled estimate. It offers researchers a framework for examining programme features, implementation, and measurement. For educational practice, it highlights aligning movement tasks, interaction structures, and reflection with explicit SEC goals. Together, the findings position dance education as a promising, context-sensitive pedagogical resource and focus attention on how embodied participation may develop into transferable social–emotional competence.