Much more than just a dog: What are we learning about the presence of canine companions in schools?

Much more than just a dog

What are we learning about the presence of canine companions in schools?

Gill Rutherford

Introduction

“Just get one!” was the advice of several principals and teachers when asked for their thoughts about having dogs in schools. The aim of this study was to understand educators’ perspectives regarding the purpose, implementation, and impact of dogs in New Zealand schools. It is hoped that the knowledge generated by this research will inform schools’ policy and practices, for the good of all involved.

Dogs serve varied roles within a school; for example, as a formally trained therapy dog assigned to a specific student, as a trained “reading dog”, as an informally trained class/school dog. In this study, apart from one therapy dog assigned to a disabled student, participants referred to “school dogs”, defined as “any canine involved in a school context for the purpose of contributing to children’s learning and personal development” (Lewis et al., 2023, p. 2). All dogs belonged to school staff as opposed to “visiting dogs” from external organisations.

To date, much of the research about dogs in schools focuses on benefits for students (Giraudet et al., 2022; Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a). The presence of dogs in schools is, however, an example of “interspecies interdependence” (Oliver, 2016, p. 242). Interdependence with humans recognises the sentience (capacity to have feelings and emotions) of canines. This study explores not only the good that dogs offer students, but also the importance of being with dogs in ways that are responsive to their needs as sentient beings (Jones & Shannon, 2025). Research questions were:

(a)How do dogs impact upon students’ school experiences?

(b)What measures are taken to support dogs’ safety and wellbeing?

(c)What factors facilitate the success of dogs in schools?

Following a summary of study methods, the discussion of findings addresses each of these interacting factors, prior to concluding the article.

Conducting the study

I am a dogophile, a lover of dogs, hence my interest in this topic. The research consisted of (a) an online Qualtrics survey sent to compulsory-sector schools nation-wide and (b) follow-up qualitative interviews with educators willing to share their experiences. The response was positive; 136 school staff responded to the survey, 58 of whom were willing to be interviewed. Regrettably, due to funding and time constraints, only 17 could take part, details of whom are summarised in Table 1. The survey content and semistructured interview guide were informed by current research and the data analysed inductively using Braun and Clarke’s (2022) thematic analysis process. This resulted in the generation of three themes and subthemes, outlined in the next section.

Findings

The difference a dog makes: Impact on students’ wellbeing and learning 

(Theme 1)

Much has been written about the positive impact of dogs on students’ physical, psychological/emotional, and social wellbeing (e.g., Giraudet et al., 2022; Lewis & Grigg, 2023b). The essence of this theme is that dogs support students’ wellbeing and learning through their relationships with students, particularly those who may be vulnerable in school environments.

Students’ wellbeing: The dog knows who needs them

Students “swarm to [dogs] like moths to a light” (survey respondent). Dogs were described as “connectors” (primary teacher–SENCO) facilitating the development of “unconditional relationships” (primary principal). When asked about the greatest benefit dogs offer schools, “the impact that [dog] has on children’s wellbeing is the most profound” (primary teacher–senior leader) and “she just brings joy” (primary teacher–SENCO) are representative of participants’ responses and reflect existing research on dogs in schools (e.g., Lewis & Grigg, 2023b). Many mentioned that dogs served as a “regulation tool” (primary principal), a highly effective means of emotional support by calming students and helping “get people into a good space” (primary principal). A school counsellor regarded his dog as a “conduit to just actually listen or give [students] a break from what’s going on in their head”. Participants referred to dogs’ empathy for students in distress—in a senior leader’s words, “he knows who needs him”. A SENCO shared an example of a little girl for whom life was tricky, commenting that “[dog] will come up, and she’ll lick her face. And normally I’m like, no, stop it, but for her, I can see that her heart needs someone to love her unconditionally.” In particular, the power of touch, largely inappropriate between teachers and students, was something comforting that dogs could offer to engender calm.

Table 1. Interview participant details

Dogs help students experiencing challenges or exclusion in their lives

Research documents the successful use of dogs for students affected by trauma, anxiety, behavioural challenges, autism, and a range of disabilities (e.g., Enders-Slegers et al., 2019; Lewis & Grigg, 2023b). Such students were described by a secondary learning support teacher as “outliers”, whose participation and social engagement in school was encumbered for different reasons. A primary teacher–senior leader spoke of children who had been uplifted by Oranga Tamariki. “They soften, the kids, you know, the kids that have challenging situations … [The dog] gives them unconditional love.” Such students’ relationships with dogs were regarded as “life-changing” (secondary principal), providing “a reason for being” (secondary principal), and facilitating inclusion within schools by contributing to students’ sense of belonging and participation. According to Lewis and Grigg (2023b), offering unconditional, nonjudgemental acceptance may be especially important for individuals who have fragile attachments with significant people in their lives; in contrast, dogs can offer safe, trusting “companionship without fear” (p. 34).

A powerful example of a dog’s influence upon distressed students was shared by a principal who had a 7-year-old child who was extremely troubled by his home circumstances yet could not talk to anyone about this (see Lewis & Grigg, 2023a for an example of children only talking to an adult via a dog). The principal explained, “the children talk to the dog about something they want an adult present to hear, but actually can’t turn to the adult and say, ‘I need you to know that this is happening for me’.” After several months, “[child] was able to tell, lift the dog’s ear and say [to the dog] …” The principal concluded, “so there’s nothing that will make me think that we shouldn’t have dogs at school”.

Another poignant example of the impact that dogs can have was shared by a principal about a child living in difficult circumstances: “This wee one with the toy, you know, that’s his special one thing. But he wants the dog to have it.” As other participants observed, dogs had the capacity to “bring out the best” (secondary learning support teacher) in students, and “allows some kids the opportunity to be kind and caring to another creature” (survey respondent). Bringing out the best in a student was exemplified in a survey participant’s account of

a very distressed and aggressive child. As he plays with the dog, he is free from attachment work with adults and peers, and his brain can rehearse caring and tenderness without the fear of failure … We have great pleasure in seeing a very different boy.

In some situations, dogs acted as magnets for students (Lewis & Grigg, 2023b). For example, if a student who is struggling socially took a dog for a walk, “other students come over and suddenly, they pull people into them just because the dog’s there. And so, it kind of includes everybody” (secondary learning support teacher). Being with a dog also facilitated acceptance, that students may be “accepted by the other kids. If one of those boys with a disability is walking with [dog], he’s suddenly gone up in the world, amongst his peers” (primary principal). A note of caution is required, however—while a dog’s presence may foster inclusion and mana, they are not a panacea for either—questions need to focus on why some students are left out in the first instance.

Dogs’ support for students’ learning

The presence of dogs in schools has been found to make a difference to students’ learning (Giraudet et al., 2022; Grové et al., 2021). Participants employed dogs strategically to facilitate attendance, responsible behaviour, concentration, communication, participation in the curriculum, and progress in learning (particularly reading). A secondary principal believed that dogs in schools provide “a foil, a segue into all sorts of things. All sorts of things you can kind of learn from the dog, relate to the lesson to sneak up on the kids from behind.”

Having time with the school dog, such as reading to them, was motivating for students, who knew they would miss out if they were late or absent. Conversely, for some students, the dog’s absence meant that “it wasn’t a good day” (secondary learning support teacher). Numerous references were made to behavioural “resetting”—“often the kids that need to be reset, flying off the handle or something … they’ll come and get [our dog], take him for a walk, just have that calming time” (primary principal). Another participant sanctioned children’s requests to walk the dog when they felt they needed a brief “get-out” (primary teacher) from class, thereby teaching them how to self-regulate and manage themselves safely.

Dogs and the curriculum

While “reading to [dog]” sessions were prevalent in participants’ schools, references to dogs were also threaded into curriculum activities, including art, maths, writing, PE, as well as students’ Individual Education Plans (IEPs). Developing basic communication skills/oral language was another way in which dogs were involved in teaching and learning. A secondary principal told of a disabled student who came twice every day to visit the school dog and “initially he’d just go ‘[dog]’. By the end of the year he could say, ‘is [dog] here today’?” Providing opportunities for nonverbal students to shine with their peers was described by a survey respondent, who had taught their dog basic sign language to accompany verbal commands. The effectiveness of doing so resulted in “pure joy” as teachers observed the “nonverbal students take command and show their peers how to [sign]”. An account of significant learning by a Year 7 student whose behaviour was “all over the place” was outlined by a secondary principal: the student’s

job was to teach my dog to read. And so, he taught [dog] to read. What we discovered was, he couldn’t concentrate. So he went from a 3 minute concentration span to a 27 minute concentration span. And he went from a 9-year-old reading age to a 13-year-old reading age, in Year 7.

Dogs support teachers’ wellbeing

Teachers were not immune to the joy of dogs. According to a survey respondent, “our dog is part of the staff, a sweet, non-judgemental colleague who is always pleased to see them”. Dogs appeared to foster staff wellbeing and support positive, meaningful relationships between students and staff, thus resulting in more effective teaching and learning contexts. An area school teacher emphasised that dogs were “such an asset. I think it’s one of those things that’s really underestimated.” Another survey respondent claimed that:

There is more smiling … and it’s like a softness that travels between children and adults alike that isn’t there without a dog at school. I guess it weaves the human elements back and this is so relevant in a highly pressured society and demanding school life.

For the dogs’ sake: Understanding dogs as sentient beings (Theme 2)

It is important to consider the experiences of parties “at both ends of the leash” (MacPherson-Mayor & van Daalen-Smith, 2020). Jones and Shannon advocate for “dog-centred language/ideology that fosters empathy and understanding for their perspective” (2025, p. 112). This theme focuses on the importance of learning about being with dogs in ways that are safe, respectful, and responsive to dogs’ wellbeing, their feelings, and rights.

Dogs’ safety and wellbeing matters

Empathy and consideration of how a dog may make sense of being in school is necessary (Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a). From a primary teacher’s point of view

You’re actually inviting another species into the space … It’s not like other things. It’s a really, just beautiful personality that can really be frightened by circumstances if it’s not handled well. Or treated not terribly well. And it needs our full attention to make it really impactful in the right way.

A staunch advocate for dogs, the same teacher asserted “it’s a long day for an animal, and they have a short life, and you don’t want to make that life all about serving everybody else. His joy, his enjoyment, that has to come first.” How long a dog spent in school each day and throughout a week was a consideration for many participants. A secondary counsellor stated that “I’m conscious of her mental health too”. What was “right for the dog and what’s good for the dog” (secondary teacher–senior leader) appeared to be a priority for many, with some giving their dogs a choice as to whether they attended school each day (Jones & Shannon, 2025).

While at school, participants were responsive to their dog’s need for space or “time-out” (Grové et al., 2021; Jones & Shannon, 2025). In some instances, a bandana (primary principal) or red ribbon (primary teacher) was worn by the dogs to signal they were “off duty”. Time-out can also be managed by having a dog-only space (Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a). An intermediate teacher explained to students, “look, that’s her zone. If she goes there, that’s a signal to you that she’s had enough. And she chooses to go there; she’s not forced.” In a primary teacher’s opinion, “I always feel that the dogs need the best union. They need to have contact release time, CRTs, that’s really important.”

Thinking beyond yourself: Learning to care about other beings

Just as dogs showed empathy to individuals, so too did they elicit empathy among students and educators (Bone, 2013; O’Brien, 2021). The concept of biophilia is reflected in some participants’ responses—put simply, a love of living things and inherent desire to connect with the natural world and one’s place in it (Bone, 2013; Lewis & Grigg, 2023b). A primary teacher believed that “I think it’s so important for kids to learn that early, to care about another creature … It’s a life skill, isn’t it?” A primary principal echoed these beliefs, that children need to be “concerned for things other than themselves”.

Caring and “being responsible for another life” (survey respondent) was demonstrated in practical acts such as ensuring dogs had water and food, were in safe places, keeping class noise levels low, and keeping a safe, calm, and clean classroom. That dogs were cared for and about was evident upon the rare occasions when school dogs died, eliciting grief for their loss, which was regarded as “another part of education … teaching [children] how to deal with that” (primary principal) (Giraudet et al., 2022).

Educating people about dogs

Not everyone likes dogs. Some people fear them, especially if they have had little contact with them due to cultural beliefs and protocols or never having had a dog. Almost all participants mentioned the need to teach students (and staff) about safe ways of behaving around dogs (Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a). A range of strategies were utilised to teach students, including participation in a short programme “dos and don’ts with dogs” (secondary principal); sharing of picture/photo books, PowerPoints or posters about the school dog; supervised introductions to dogs; and monitoring of student–dog interactions. Providing such education was regarded as vital: a primary principal claimed that:

We can’t continue to cotton wool our kids. A lot of these kids go home to environments [where] they’ll come across dogs roaming that are unregistered and untrained and it’s better for them to have some exposure here and know what to do, than to actually keep them in the dark around stuff … This is definitely a safe space for a lot of our kids here and I think as a result of having dogs in schools, they’ll be safer outside of school as well.

Numerous participants commented on the success of dog education in dissipating students’ fear, noting that, in most cases, over time, children who feared dogs came to be comfortable with and fond of them.

The dog’s just part of the furniture: Facilitating the success of dogs in schools (Theme 3)

Unlike the United Kingdom, where Ofsted (the school inspectorate similar to the Education Review Office [ERO]) has commended the presence of dogs in schools (Lewis & Grigg, 2023a), dogs in New Zealand schools have yet to be officially sanctioned (Jones & Shannon, 2025). Nevertheless, the extent to which dogs were “very much a part of our ethos” (primary principal) was conveyed in the comment, “just like non-uniforms are part of [school], teachers having their dogs here is part of [school]” (secondary principal). This theme focuses on factors that make schools “a better place because [dog’s] here, really” (primary principal).

How dogs come to be in schools

Numerous participants cited personal reasons for bringing their dogs to school, especially for socialisation purposes. However, when educators “realised what an impact the dog was having on students … they sort of shifted … they could see the benefits for [students]” (secondary teacher–senior leader). Research-informed decisions to bring dogs into schools were mentioned by only three participants, who acknowledged the dearth of New Zealand research on this topic (Jones & Shannon, 2025). Participants highlighted the significance of school leadership in welcoming dogs into their schools. As a secondary counsellor stated, “I’m just lucky that we’ve got a headmaster who’s got a massive heart and massive amounts of empathy … He goes, ‘Nah, just do it’.” In most cases, the bringing of dogs into school was “an organic process” (primary teacher–senior leader), starting small and evolving in “small, measured steps” (secondary principal) in response to schools’ needs (Grové et al., 2021).

The “right” kinds of dogs

“I think there are dogs, and there are dogs” (secondary learning support teacher). In this study, a range of dog breeds were included in schools, perhaps the most intriguing combination in one school being a pedigree corgi and an ex-Mongrel Mob pig dog. Golden retrievers, described by a participant as “pretty damn bomb proof” (primary principal) were popular and hypoallergenic dogs were regarded as particularly suitable. Perhaps a more important criterion than breed was “the nature of the dog” (secondary learning support teacher) or the “canine personality” (Jones & Shannon, 2025, p. 115), with calmness and trustworthiness priorities. The age of the dog also mattered—while several participants brought their puppies into school, others expressed concern that schools could be too stressful for puppies and could compromise teachers’ work with their class. As a guideline in terms of a dog’s wellbeing, a minimum recommended age for working in a service role is 12–24 months, to allow for full maturation (Lewis & Grigg, 2023a; Ng et al., 2019).

Training for everybody matters

As documented internationally (e.g., Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a; Ng et al., 2019), training of dogs, educators, and students matters. Learning the “language of dog” (Jones & Shannon, 2025, p. 111) is regarded as essential for the development of safe, trusting, and respectful reciprocal relationships across species. Most participants had informal training experience. A basic level of training was considered a prerequisite; however, it was recognised that attention also needed to be paid to the dogs’ “owners”, as evident in a secondary teacher–senior leader’s comment: “I wonder if it’s more about the training of the person. If you’re not reading the dog and not seeing the situation and reading it right, you could end up with a terrible accident. So, I think it’s the people that need to be cleared rather than the dog” (Jones & Shannon, 2025; Ng et al., 2019). Several participants engaged in their own, self-funded training, finding veterinarian Mark Vette’s training resources particularly helpful. Indeed, one thought it would be useful to have a national training module for inducting dogs into schools, so that we “could all sing from the same song sheet”. The need for “some pre-requirement, some standards of care for the dog” (primary teacher–SENCO) was reiterated by other participants. Only one school in the study had an annual assessment and monitoring of school dogs, carried out by a teacher with appropriate training and experience.

Do policies matter?

Opinions were divided in both the survey and interview responses as to the need for a “dogs in schools” policy to ensure that both students and dogs are served well. Approximately half the participants’ schools had some kind of policy. Many whose schools had none believed a policy could facilitate consistency of practice.

Instituting policy is recommended in research literature (e.g., Grové et al., 2021). In New Zealand, Jones and Shannon (2025) offer helpful guidelines for creating an “ethical multi-species classroom” (p. 117) worth implementing. Some examples of what may need to be considered to support the safety, wellbeing, and rights of students, staff, and dogs are outlined in Table 2.

Concerns about dogs in schools

As might be expected, those who took part in the study were “pro-dogs”, therefore few concerns were expressed. The few who did reflected issues documented by other researchers (e.g., Giraudet et al., 2022; Lewis et al., 2023). The most prominent concern was the possibility of dogs biting children, which was addressed by having effective dog education, clear rules, and ongoing monitoring. Allergies were responded to by close supervision of students, who were not placed in classrooms in which a dog was present. Interestingly, only one participant referred to dog health and hygiene considerations, something that is signalled as important in research literature (e.g., Bone, 2013; Giraudet et al., 2022). Some participants mentioned fear and/or resistance from parents or other teachers; however, this was respectfully resolved on an individual-by-individual basis.

Table 2. Policy considerations: Some suggestions to serve students, 

teachers, and dogs well

Concerns about risk factors for dogs’ quality of life (Brelsford et al., 2020; Giraudet et al., 2022; Jones & Shannon, 2025) were also noted. Making sure dogs were safe was raised by several participants, as one primary teacher explained:

I need to make sure he’s doing the right thing … I need to keep him safe. And that’s always in the back of my mind. That’s why I think sometimes I go home exhausted because I have to keep an eye on him.

While loving having their dog in class, the need to be simultaneously responsive to students and dog placed a higher workload and time pressure on some teachers (Grové et al., 2021; Lewis & Grigg, 2023a), who typically had little/no training to include dogs in their teaching (Jones & Shannon, 2025; Lewis et al., 2023).

In conclusion

This study contributes to and reflects international research regarding the efficacy of dogs in schools, taking into consideration both the dogs’ and students’ wellbeing. The responses from survey and interview participants deepen understanding about the purpose, implementation, and impact of dogs in schools. Their feedback as discussed in this article will hopefully provide guidance for other schools. Regarding implications for practice, documentation of policy and practices by schools is strongly recommended, not only for children’s and educators’ sakes, but also to “ensure the rights of dogs working in all canine programmes” (Jones & Shannon, 2025, p. 109). At a national level, the following suggestions are offered, to:

•officially recognise and sanction dogs in schools at a national level, particularly as conduits for students’ inclusion and wellbeing

•develop a national set of guidelines for dogs in schools, as well as training for school dogs/teachers

•establish networks of schools/teachers for support and sharing of successful practice and training (e.g., see NZ School Support Dogs Facebook page)

•conduct further New Zealand-based research to add breadth and depth to this exploratory study’s findings.

The study indicates that, providing dogs are carefully cared for, dogs in schools are much more than “just dogs”, and make a valuable contribution to school communities in terms of their care for and inclusion of all students. Indeed, Bone (2013) suggests that a dog “is a conduit for learning to be human; some propose that is only through the animal that we recognize our humanity” (p. 61). If we accept that a purpose of education is to learn to be human and live well together, then dogs are an “x-factor” (primary principal) in that endeavour, reaching “children in ways that adults cannot” (primary teacher–senior leader) (Lewis & Grigg, 2023b).

In closing, I am grateful to all the participants who shared their time and insight to make this project possible. Their love for their work with students and dogs and encouragement to “just get one!” shone through their responses. It is therefore fitting to end with a participant’s words, which powerfully convey the extent to which dogs can make a difference within schools:

I think that I can’t be a teacher without [dog]. I can’t be the teacher I am without him … it takes you to another level of reciprocation with the children. It gives them so much more insight into other beings … It’s been profound, and I never knew it would be.

References

Bone, J. (2013). The animal as fourth educator: A literature review of animals and young children in pedagogical relationships. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(2), 57-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911303800208

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2

Brelsford, V. L., Dimolareva, M., Gee, N. R., & Meints, K. (2020). Best practice standards in animal-assisted interventions: How the LEAD risk assessment tool can help. Animals, 10(974), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10060974

Enders-Slegers, M., Hediger, K., Beetz, A., Jegatheesan, B., & Turner, D. (2019). Animal-assisted interventions within an international perspective: Trends, research, and practices. In A. H. Fine (Ed.), Handbook on animal-assisted therapy (5th ed., pp. 465–477). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-03315-3

Giraudet, C. S. E., Liu, K., McElligott, A. G., & Cobb, M. (2022). Are children and dogs best friends? A scoping review to explore the positive and negative effects of child–dog interactions. PeerJ, 10(e14532). https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14532

Grové, C., Henderson, L., Lee, F., & Wardlaw, P. (2021). Therapy dogs in educational settings: Guidelines and recommendations for implementation. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 8(655104), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.655104

Jones, E., & Shannon, G. (2025). Dogs in schools: Dogs Connect as an example of a dogs-first wellbeing dog programme. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 37(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol37iss1id1168

Lewis, H., Godfrey, J. O., & Knight, C. (2023). Tales of the unexpected: Teachers’ experiences of working with children and dogs in schools. Human–Animal Interactions, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1079/hai.2023.0040

Lewis, H., & Grigg, R. (2023a). Towards a pedagogy for effective practice. In Dogs in schools: Pedagogy and practice for happy, healthy and humane interventions (pp. 47–66). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003257073

Lewis, H., & Grigg, R. (2023b). School dogs: What does the research tell us? In Dogs in schools: Pedagogy and practice for happy, healthy and humane interventions (pp. 20–46). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003257073-4

MacPherson-Mayor, D., & van Daalen-Smith, C. (2020). At both ends of the leash: Preventing service-dog oppression through the practice of dyadic-belonging. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 9(2), 73–102. https://doi.org/10.15353/cjds.v9i2.626

Ng, Z. Y., Albright, J. D., Fine, A. H., & Peralta, J. M. (2019). Our ethical and moral responsibility: Ensuring the welfare of therapy animals. In A. H. Fine (Ed.), Handbook on animal-assisted therapy (5th ed., pp. 175–198). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-03315-3

O’Brien, J. (2021). Animal-assisted learning in inclusive schools and early childhood settings in Aotearoa. Kairaranga, 22(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.54322/kairaranga.v22i1.360

Oliver, K. (2016). Service dogs: Between animal studies and disability studies. philoSOPHIA, 6(2), 241–258. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/641843