Since the onset of the full-scale war in 2022, the education system in Ukraine has undergone a profound transformation. Schools have been operating under conditions of chronic uncertainty, marked by continuous shifts between online, offline, and shelter-based (underground) modes of instruction. Previous studies highlight the multidimensional challenges faced by education during the war. Velykodna (2023) demonstrates that primary schools in Kryvyi Rih experienced extreme pressure due to the rapid reorganisation of timetables, the transition to distance learning, and the provision of crisis support to students and families. At the same time, teachers’ psycho-emotional resilience and the level of institutional support emerged as key determinants of educational continuity. Chepak and Klymenko (2022) extend this perspective by identifying systemic risks - organisational, staffing, and economic - that intensify children’s socio-emotional needs and restrict access to quality education in secondary schooling. Generally, for all school systems, digital inequality has further exacerbated educational vulnerability. According to Ovcharuk et al. (2023), pandemic-related restrictions combined with wartime disruptions significantly deepened disparities in access to online learning: more than 54,000 teachers identified unstable internet connectivity, insufficient ICT resources, and low levels of digital competence as critical barriers. Similarly, Budnyk and Sajdak-Burska (2023) argue that pre-service teachers in Ukraine and Poland remain insufficiently prepared to support children in crisis contexts, particularly in terms of psycho-emotional stress, communication, and motivation in war and post-war conditions.

This study examines how schooling in Ukraine has been reconfigured under conditions of full-scale war, conceptualising education as a social institution operating within a prolonged emergency rather than a temporary disruption. The research examines how school education in Ukraine adapts to the conditions of full-scale war, with a particular focus on children’s real cognitive, social, and emotional capabilities. By focusing on teachers working with internally displaced children, the study aims to contribute to international debates on education in emergencies, digital inequality, and psycho-emotional distress in conflict-affected contexts. The study is guided by the following research questions:

• How do teachers foster transforming the educational environment into a space of future-oriented stability for students experiencing war?

• In what ways does the school’s educational environment enhance or limit the capabilities of students with special educational needs and displaced backgrounds to participate fully in learning?

The theoretical framework of this study integrates the concept of radical hope with the capability approach. Radical hope (Lear, 2006) provides a lens through which education can be understood as a resource for restoring agency and collective subjectivity in contexts of mass trauma and institutional disruptions. The capability approach (Nussbaum, 2011) offers an ethical and analytical framework for evaluating education beyond formal access, focusing instead on children’s real opportunities to achieve valued ways of being and doing. In armed conflict settings, education systems may continue to function nominally, yet war profoundly constrains students’ ability to convert available resources into meaningful learning and development.

Guided by the outlined theoretical perspectives, this study adopted a qualitative design to capture teachers’ narratives of schooling under wartime conditions. Data were generated in 2025 through semi-structured interviews (Bryman et al., 2022) with school staff from Kryvyi Rih and Zaporizhzhia, two cities close to the frontline. The sample included one principal, 18 teachers, two teacher assistants, two psychologists, three speech therapists, and two occupational therapists. Participants were recruited through a combination of targeted and accessible channels, including information letters distributed via municipal school corporate email networks, social media announcements targeting private schools and international NGOs involved in schooling and tutoring, and direct invitations facilitated by the Department for Children and Youth Affairs of Kryvyi Rih. This multi-channel strategy supported the inclusion of participants with diverse professional roles and institutional backgrounds. Interviews were conducted in Ukrainian, either face-to-face or online, and lasted between 40 minutes and one hour. The interview guide was structured around four interconnected domains: (1) an introduction clarifying the project aims, ethical framework, and focus on students; (2) demographic information capturing participants’ educational and professional backgrounds; (3) students’ needs, addressing academic, psychosocial, and social adjustment challenges; and (4) professionals’ realities, examining teacher competencies, training needs, school collaboration, and engagement with parents. This structure enabled the integration of teachers’ lived experiences of teaching across online, offline, and shelter-based settings with their observations of children’s behaviour, educational progress, and social participation. The semi-structured format combined a predefined thematic framework with methodological flexibility, allowing participants to introduce unanticipated issues and personal interpretations. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Methodological Council of Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University (January 2025, No. 6). Participants received full information about the study and their right to withdraw at any time; both written and verbal informed consent were obtained. Interviews were conducted in a supportive setting, with psychosocial assistance available if needed, and interviewers were trained to respond sensitively to signs of distress. All data were anonymised during transcription and securely stored on encrypted university servers. To mitigate power asymmetries between researchers and participants, the voluntary nature of participation was emphasised, and evaluative language was deliberately avoided.

The study indicates that school staff transform the educational environment into a space of future-oriented stability by establishing predictable routines and innovative pedagogical practices. By developing security routines in general class management for transition classes to shelters, school staff reduce trauma and create a sense of normalcy despite external chaos for children with special educational needs. Radical hope is manifested through the collective professional growth of staff; teachers actively support one another using digital skills - such as software for visualisation material and AI-generated music in learning languages - shifting the institutional focus from mere survival to creative evolution. The educational environment significantly influences the capabilities of students with special educational needs and displaced backgrounds: (1) Enhancing factors include the philosophy of inclusive classes: all children in such settings tend to be more tolerant of diverse stress-related behavioural reactions. This inclusivity fosters a culture of mutual peer support that benefits all students during air raids. (2) Limiting factors are critical barriers that remain, primarily the internal constraints of psychological distress. For many students, the fear of bombardment creates a mental block that limits their capability to focus or engage, even when physical infrastructure is provided. Additionally, technical gaps like inconsistent internet and the lack of private spaces for psychological support in shelters restrict the full participation of the most vulnerable students. Ultimately, the research demonstrates that while the war threatens educational continuity, the deliberate adaptation of the school environment partially restores and expands students' capabilities through a resilient, hope-driven pedagogical framework. The limitations of this study include its regional focus and its focus on the first years of the war. Nevertheless, the findings are promising and point towards future research directions, including how the initial radical hope observed in teachers evolves into long-term systemic change or, conversely, leads to professional burnout as the conflict persists.

Bryman, Alan, Edward Bell, Jennifer Reck, and Jessica Fields. 2022. Social research methods. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Budnyk, Oksana, and Agnieszka Sajdak-Burska. 2023. “Pedagogical Support for Ukrainian War-Affected Children: Future Teachers’ Readiness to Work in Crisis. Comparative Analysis of Research Results in Ukraine and Poland.” Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University 10 (3): 16–31. https://doi.org/10.15330/jpnu.10.3.16-31. Chepak, Viktoriia, and Olha Klymenko. 2022. “Ukrainian Education in the Conditions of War: Challenges and Risks.” In EDULEARN22 Proceedings, 2646–56. Valencia: IATED. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2022.0678. Lear, Jonathan. 2006. Radical hope: Ethics in the face of cultural devastation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nussbaum, Martha C. 2011. Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ovcharuk, Oksana, Iryna Ivaniuk, and Maryna Leshchenko. 2023. “Impact of School Lockdown on Access to Online Instruction during the War in Ukraine.” European Journal of Education 58 (4): 561–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12589. Velykodna, Mariayna, Nataliia Mishaka, Zoya Miroshnyk, and Vlad Deputatov. 2023. “Primary Education in Wartime: How the Russian Invasion Affected Ukrainian Teachers and the Educational Process in Kryvyi Rih.” Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala 15 (1): 285–309. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/15.1/697.