School bonding refers to the “connections” that youth have with their schools and various aspects of their academic lives. It focuses on three dimensions: attachment to school, attachment to personnel and school commitment, generally reflecting the sense of belonging and identity, school safety, feeling like that they are part of the school and are cared for by others at the school. The relevance of school bonding to students’ lives is highlighted in studies showing that school connectedness makes a unique contribution to student outcomes even after considering family and peer connectedness. So it is generally accepted that school connectedness is associated with better academic outcomes and fewer behavioral and emotional problems and it exerts a profound effect in promoting student development and preventing health risk behaviors. This paper mainly reviews conceptualizations, measurements and influence factors of school bonding, and also intends to offer recommendations for the future research. Hirschi’s social control theory was one of the first comprehensive conceptualizations of school bonding, he initially outlined four elements of social bonds: attachment, commitment, involvement and belief. But Social Development Theory describes connectedness as the result of a process that begins with the student’s perception of opportunities for involvement with others and their social environment. Although researchers have different opinions of school bonding, it’s also having some consistent themes, such as student’s sense of belonging, teacher support, fair and effective discipline. Self-report is the most often used method in the assessment of school bonding. This paper mainly introduces some representative scales, such as Effective School Battery Scale, Psychological Sense of School Membership Scale and so on. Discussion of the scales will focus on the dimensions assessed and the depth and complexity of assessment. The article also discussed the influence factors of school bonding, these influences could be grouped under several domains including teacher care, peer relations, broader school relationships, school disciplinary policies and practices, activities within the school’s guidance and counseling program, opportunities for talent development. In general, the main can be divided into three major factors, namely, school characteristics, individual characteristics and family background factors. Although a fairly consistent pattern emerged for most of the expected relations in school bonding, the research in this area can be further strengthened. The first major area is in the conceptualization of school bonding. Criteria should involve the inclusion of multiple dimensions and depth of dimension assessment. The development of a standardized measure of school bonding will be helpful in establishing and enforcing these criteria. The lack of empirical studies that focus specifically on positive outcomes is another area for improvement. Despite the tendency of research to focus on negative life outcomes for prevention efforts, more studies looking at the ability of school bonding to promote and strengthen positive life outcomes are needed. Finally, more information regarding developmental moderators of school bonding is clearly needed. Although there are good theoretical arguments, empirical studies comparing school bonding across developmental stages would add to the knowledge base. Improving what is known about the developmental variables associated with increases, decreases, and stability in school bonding is likely to provide clues about how to enhance quality of life for youth.