Beyond the Bombs for Ukrainian Students: How Stress, Health, and Resilience Shape Learning in Armed Conflict

• In Event: Families, Care, and Resilience in Education Amid Crisis

Proposal

Armed conflicts disrupt the lives of millions of children around the world, often leading to profound and lasting effects on their development, mental health, and educational trajectories. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in the internal displacement of over three million people, nearly one-third of whom are children. Against this backdrop, the Myr Project was launched in December 2024 in Kyiv and Kharkiv to explore how war-induced stress and displacement affect children’s ability to learn, with a particular focus on executive functioning, psychological well-being, and physiological stress responses.

This study aims to investigate how variables within a vulnerability–stress model—chronic stress exposure, trauma, resilience, biological and psychological health, and school climate—interact to shape learning outcomes in children living in conflict zones. The primary research question guiding this study is: How do stress, resilience, health, and executive functioning interact to affect academic performance among Ukrainian children living through armed conflict?

A total of 129 children (68 boys, 61 girls), aged 8–9 years and enrolled in third grade across five schools in Kyiv and Kharkiv, participated in the study. Data collection combined biological & physiological measures, psychometric assessments, cognitive tasks, and academic tests. Hair cortisol concentration was used to assess cumulative stress exposure over the preceding three months, using LC-MS/MS methodology. Executive functions were assessed via three standardized cognitive tasks: a N-back task for working memory, the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test for cognitive flexibility, and a Stroop task for inhibitory control. Academic outcomes were measured through standardized math and reading exams, as well as curriculum-based evaluations. Additionally, participants completed validated instruments to assess perceived stress (PSS-C), psychological resilience (CD-RISC-10), well-being (PWB-c), school climate (adapted TIMSS items), trauma exposure, and perceived impacts of the war. Global health indicators included body mass index, blood pressure, resting heart rate, and parent-reported pediatric quality of life (PedsQL).

The results paint a complex picture of how stress and trauma shape learning trajectories. All participants had experienced at least one war-related event within the past three months, with boys reporting slightly more incidents than girls. Despite this, perceived stress levels did not differ by gender or location, and were situated at the upper end of the “moderate” range. Hair cortisol data, however, revealed concerning patterns of chronic biological stress, particularly in children who reported few subjective symptoms—suggesting possible emotional suppression or physiological exhaustion.

Resilience scores in this sample were approximately seven points below general population norms. While girls reported slightly higher levels of psychological well-being than boys, resilience scores did not differ significantly by gender. Importantly, children who reported higher resilience also performed better on standardized exams and executive function tasks, particularly those involving flexibility and working memory. Correlation analyses confirmed that perceived stress was negatively associated with resilience (r = –0.35) and well-being (r = –0.19), and positively correlated with trauma exposure (r = 0.48). These findings support the hypothesis that resilience acts as a buffer, mitigating the cognitive and emotional effects of trauma and stress.

In terms of executive functioning, Ukrainian children performed well on working memory tasks—especially in the demanding 2-back condition—but at the cost of increased false alarms, suggesting a more impulsive response strategy under cognitive load. This adaptation may reflect the pressures of living in a high-alert environment where quick reactions are prioritized over caution. Similarly, in the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, children with greater cognitive rigidity (i.e., more perseverative errors and slower transitions) scored lower on academic exams. Performance on inhibitory control tasks (Stroop) was associated with psychological well-being, but negatively correlated with reading accuracy—indicating a trade-off between emotional regulation and cognitive efficiency under stress.

Despite these challenges, most children reported moderately positive appraisals of their current life circumstances on the Living Through War scale, indicating an impressive degree of optimism and adaptability. School climate emerged as a crucial protective factor. Children who felt safe, supported, and respected at school demonstrated better well-being, higher resilience, and stronger executive functioning. In Kharkiv, where the conflict has been particularly severe, students paradoxically reported higher school motivation and energy than their peers in Kyiv, possibly reflecting variations in local educational leadership or psychosocial programming.

From a health perspective, most children presented with normal developmental indicators, and no signs of stress-induced precocious puberty were observed. However, subtle physical symptoms such as fatigue and minor somatic complaints were more common in children with weaker cognitive control and lower resilience. These findings underscore the importance of adopting a biopsychosocial lens when assessing children’s learning potential in humanitarian contexts.

Taken together, this study provides compelling empirical evidence that children’s learning capacities in conflict zones cannot be understood solely through traditional academic assessments. Instead, they must be situated within an integrated framework that considers chronic stress exposure, cognitive functioning, subjective and biological resilience, and school climate. While trauma can impair attention, flexibility, and impulse control, the presence of strong psychosocial supports—especially within the school environment—can foster resilience and sustain learning.

This research has significant implications for humanitarian response strategies. Interventions should move beyond trauma-centered approaches and prioritize the development of educational and psychosocial programs that actively support executive functioning, psychological resilience, and the overall well-being of children. By identifying the mechanisms through which war disrupts learning—and the conditions that enable recovery—the Myr Project contributes to a growing body of evidence advocating for child-centered, data-informed, and context-sensitive educational responses in emergency settings.

Ultimately, protecting children’s right to education in wartime requires more than keeping classrooms open. It requires cultivating environments—biological, psychological, and pedagogical—that allow children to learn, adapt, and imagine a future beyond the bombs.

Author

• Olivier Arvisais, Université du Québec à Montréal