Resilience Through Dialogue: Why Talking it Out Matters in Education and Beyond

Silence often falls in classrooms when a student raises the question everyone else has been avoiding, perhaps about gender, race, politics, or religion. In that moment, what happens next matters. Do we lean into the discomfort and talk it out, or change the subject and let curiosity turn into unease? Across the world, educators face this tension daily. Young people are coming of age in a connected but divided world. Social media exposes them to endless voices and opinions, sometimes in echo chambers, yet they are not passive recipients. Many question, curate, and resist polarisation. Schools and universities, when designed as open spaces, can amplify this agency. The task of education is no longer just delivering knowledge, but equipping students to disagree respectfully, listen with curiosity, and find common ground. In short, it is about building the resilience needed to navigate difference and complexity, both now and in the future.

Dialogue as Preparation for the World of Work
Employers across industries consistently highlight communication, adaptability, and collaborative problem-solving as essential skills (World Economic Forum, 2023). These are not abstract “soft skills” but the foundations of teamwork, conflict management, and leadership. Few workplaces are made up of people who think alike; graduates who have practised engaging with difference are those who thrive. UNESCO’s Futures of Education report (2021) emphasises that living together requires dialogue, not avoidance. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that learning environments that allow difference to be expressed without fear are those that build confidence and resilience (Edmonson et al., 2016). This ability to stay engaged when perspectives clash is not simply a communication skill, it is resilience in action, preparing students for professional life where disagreement and uncertainty are the norm.

Safe Spaces, or Silenced Spaces?
The terms “safe space” and “trigger warning” have become lightning rods in debates about education, often cited as evidence of oversensitivity or censorship. Critics argue that they encourage avoidance of challenge. While intended to recognise that certain material may be distressing, research suggests trigger warnings do little to reduce distress and may even heighten feelings of vulnerability (Bellet et al., 2016; Jones et al., 2020). A more constructive alternative lies in embedding psychological safety into the classroom. Psychological safety is not about filtering out difficult ideas; it is about creating conditions where disagreement and strong emotion can be expressed without humiliation or punishment (Edmondson & Lei, 2014). Instead of simply alerting students to challenging content, educators can set shared ground rules, facilitate respectful dialogue, and support reflection afterwards. This approach acknowledges that discomfort is part of learning while ensuring it does not become harmful. When classrooms normalise dialogue in this way, they help students build resilience: the capacity to remain present and engaged in moments of tension, rather than withdrawing or silencing themselves.

Protecting Minds Like We Protect Bodies
In schools and universities, we insist on physical safety: fire drills, secure buildings, and risk assessments are routine. In laboratories, students and researchers never enter without PPE such as gloves, goggles, lab coats because physical safety is non-negotiable. These measures are taken for granted, because no one would dream of allowing young people or staff to work in unsafe conditions. Yet while we make obvious provisions to protect the body, far less attention is given to protecting the mind. The risks may be less visible, but they are just as real. A classroom where students fear humiliation, or a seminar where mistakes are silenced, can be as hazardous psychologically as a lab without fume hoods.

Psychological PPE means embedding structures that help people face challenge safely: clear ground rules for dialogue, rituals for reflection, and simple strategies to regulate emotions under stress. Just as physical PPE allows students to experiment safely in the lab, psychological PPE allows them to engage with disagreement and conflict in the classroom or lecture theatre without being overwhelmed. In my own work with frontline staff and first responders, I have seen how these practices, grounding exercises, peer check-ins, shared norms, prevent stress from escalating and make open dialogue possible even in the most demanding circumstances (Cogan, 2025; Cogan et al., 2024). Bringing that same seriousness to education acknowledges that minds, like bodies, need protection to thrive.

What the Evidence Shows
Evidence from across the globe points in the same direction. In Finland, dialogic education is part of the curriculum, with students assessed on their ability to debate complex issues such as politics and religion, an approach linked to civic engagement and confidence in handling disagreement (Sybing, 2023). In the United States, strategies like “structured academic controversy” and “philosophical chairs” ask students to argue both sides of an issue, building reasoning, empathy, and tolerance even around divisive topics (Jensen et al., 2021). In Australia, embedding Indigenous perspectives into higher education has sparked dialogue around history, spirituality, and justice, strengthening belonging and preparing students for complexity (Gainsford, 2021). OECD surveys confirm that students who engage in structured social and political discussions at school feel a stronger sense of belonging and transition more smoothly into work (OECD, 2020). The same principle applies beyond education. In healthcare, teams that enable respectful challenge over decisions or ethics make fewer mistakes and experience greater wellbeing (Edmondson & Lei, 2014). These environments are not only safer, they are more resilient. Dialogue, in short, strengthens individuals and organisations alike.

Dialogue as Resilience
When students learn to engage with disagreement without humiliation, they develop coping skills and emotional regulation. Dialogic teaching has been shown to increase tolerance of uncertainty, interpersonal trust, and the ability to navigate difficult issues (Murphy et al., 2022). Such students are less likely to retreat from conflict and more likely to see it as part of growth. This is not about shielding students from ideas but equipping them to meet ideas with confidence. Structured dialogue enhances critical thinking and belonging, both key predictors of resilience and wellbeing (Hollinsworth, 2024). In an era of climate anxiety, digital disruption, and cultural division, dialogue is not just an educational method but a foundation for mental health and resilience (Williamson et al., 2023).

A coherent framework for considering how schools can actively shape resilience is offered by Michael Ungar, who identifies nine factors of resilience that are within the influence of educational settings (Ungar, 2023). These include: structure; consequences; intimate and sustaining relationships; a powerful identity; a sense of control; a sense of belonging, spirituality or life purpose; rights and responsibilities; safety and support; and positive expectations. Ungar also stresses that resilience is not simply about “bouncing back,” but about “navigating and negotiating” for resources in ways that are meaningful to young people’s culture and context. Improving school climate has also been shown to play a pivotal role in resilience. Fretz (2021) highlights three interrelated keys: building positive relationships, maintaining clear expectations, and fostering student engagement. When these elements are aligned, schools create conditions where other resilience factors can flourish, reinforcing psychological safety and belonging as essential to learning.

Together, these perspectives emphasise that resilience emerges not simply from individual grit, but from the quality of relationships and environments that surround young people.

Conclusion
The role of education has always been to prepare young people for the world they will inherit, a world that is diverse, complex, and often divided, but also rich with opportunities for renewal. Recognising psychological safety as tolerance for disagreement, rather than avoidance of it, helps move past false debates about “safe spaces.” Young people are not fragile recipients to be sheltered, but active participants who, given the right conditions, can use dialogue to build resilience, confidence, and the capacity to shape the future. Ungar’s nine factors and Fretz’s keys to school climate remind us that resilience does not emerge in isolation but through the ecology of relationships and environments that schools create. When educators provide safety and support, foster belonging, and build positive expectations, they are laying the foundations for resilience just as surely as when they teach dialogue skills. By talking it out openly, respectfully, and sometimes uncomfortably, we prepare students not only for exams, but for life. And in doing so, we give them what may be the most important skill of all: resilience in the face of uncertainty.

References
Bellet, B. W., Jones, P. J., & McNally, R. J. (2018). Trigger warning: Empirical evidence ahead. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 61, 134-141.

Cogan, N. (2025). Creating safe and trauma-informed learning environments: A culture of excellence in schools and universities. Education Today. Minnis Journals. Education Today

Cogan, N., Craig, A., Milligan, L., McCluskey, R., Burns, T., Ptak, W., … & De Kock, J. (2024). ‘I’ve got no PPE to protect my mind’: understanding the needs and experiences of first responders exposed to trauma in the workplace. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 15(1), 2395113.

Cogan, N., Morton, L., Campbell, J., Irvine Fitzpatrick, L., Lamb, D., De Kock, J., … & Porges, S. (2025). Neuroception of psychological safety scale (NPSS): validation with a UK based adult community sample. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 16(1), 2490329.

Edmondson, A. C., Higgins, M., Singer, S., & Weiner, J. (2016). Understanding psychological safety in health care and education organizations: a comparative perspective. Research in Human Development, 13(1), 65-83.

Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1),23–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305

Fretz, J. R. (2021, February 19). 3 Keys to Improving School Climate: How 1 ensures the other 2 succeed. Education Today. https://www.educationtoday.com.au/news-detail/-Keys-to-Improving-School-Climate-5183

Gainsford, A. (2021). Embedding Indigenous knowledges in the design of higher education curriculum: An international study in law education.

Gómez-Restrepo, C., Sarmiento-Suárez, M. J., Alba-Saavedra, M., Calvo-Valderrama, M. G., Rincón-Rodríguez, C. J., Bird, V. J., Priebe, S., & van Loggerenberg, F. (2023). Development and implementation of DIALOG+S in the school setting as a tool for promoting adolescent mental well-being and resilience in a post-armed conflict area in Colombia: Exploratory cluster randomized controlled trial. JMIR Formative Research, 7, e46757. https://doi.org/10.2196/46757

Hollinsworth, D. (2024). Decolonizing Australian universities: Why embedding Indigenous content in the curriculum fails that task. In Critical racial and decolonial literacies (pp. 32-48). Bristol University Press.

Jensen, E., Pugh, S. L., & D’Mello, S. K. (2021, April). A deep transfer learning approach to modeling teacher discourse in the classroom. In LAK21: 11th international learning analytics and knowledge conference (pp. 302-312).

Jones, P. J., Bellet, B. W., & McNally, R. J. (2020). Helping or harming? The effect of trigger warnings on individuals with trauma histories. Clinical Psychological Science, 8(5), 905-917.
OECD. (2020). Education at a glance: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en

Sybing, R. (2023). Dialogue in the Language Classroom: Theory and Practice from a Classroom Discourse Analysis. Routledge.

UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing.

Ungar, M. (2023). Student resilience: The role of educators, schools, families and communities. Education Today. https://www.educationtoday.com.au/news-detail/Student-Resilience-6239

World Economic Forum. (2023). Future of jobs report 2023.