Promoting well-being is no longer merely an individual matter but a goal that concerns society as a whole. In recent years, scientific research has shifted its focus from the simple notion of “health” — understood as the absence of disease — towards a broader vision encompassing psychological, social, cultural, and relational dimensions. In this context, it becomes crucial to explore which values, concepts, and practices young people associate with their inner balance and collective living. Understanding the perspective of younger generations means not only portraying the present, but also anticipating the future needs of society.

With this aim, during the Open Day 2025 held in April 2025, the University Centre for Inclusion of the University of Parma (directed by Professor Dolores Rollo) proposed an original activity for prospective students: a themed crossword puzzle entitled Il Crucibenessere (Riseri). The exercise, designed to stimulate curiosity and participation, aimed to reveal the concepts that young people consider fundamental for personal and collective well-being.

After completing the crossword, participants — 54 students with an average age of 18.5 years (23 males, 26 females, and 5 who did not indicate their gender) — were asked to select the words they found most meaningful for their own and others’ lives. The crossword included the following terms: ethics, activism, resilience, meritocracy, inclusion, self-esteem, determination, guidance, rights, hope, ableism, patriarchy, assertiveness, optimism, and fragility.

From the analysis of the responses, two particularly significant terms emerged: determination and inclusion. The first was chosen as a central word by 13 students, suggesting that young people associate well-being with the ability to react with perseverance and willpower in the face of difficulty. Determination, in fact, is a familiar construct for students, who link it to persistence and sustained effort towards a goal, even when confronted with obstacles. However, it is important to note that if this concept is interpreted solely in individual terms, it risks overlooking the social, cultural and economic factors that shape one’s opportunities for success.

Inclusion, with 17 total preferences (10 as the first choice), represents instead the relational dimension of well-being: feeling welcomed, recognised and respected in an environment that values differences. This result underscores that well-being is not merely a personal matter but is profoundly connected to the quality of the environment in which people live and study.

Other terms such as self-esteem, resilience, ethics, and rights also received a considerable number of preferences (three as first choices). Self-esteem and resilience relate to confidence in oneself and the ability to cope with challenges, while ethics and rights highlight the need for shared values that foster harmonious coexistence within a civil society, as well as legal protection. The role attributed to hope and optimism is also noteworthy, as both appeared across all response rankings: two words reflecting the need to look to the future with confidence — a fundamental condition for psychological balance and intrinsic motivation.

Conversely, other terms received less attention, such as meritocracy, activism, equity, guidance, and fragility. This may suggest that, for young people, well-being is more strongly associated with internal and relational dimensions rather than abstract or structural concepts. Interestingly, meritocracy — often seen as a positive value — may appear ambivalent: if not grounded in ethical principles, it risks promoting the myth that “success depends solely on you,” ignoring the structural inequalities that influence opportunity.

We live in a society that celebrates strength, determination, and resilience as essential values. From an early age, we are taught to “hold on,” “never give up,” and “stay strong.” Yet, alongside this rhetoric of strength, there exists a dimension too often overlooked: fragility, chosen as significant by only one student and as a third response. Fragility should not be understood as weakness to be hidden, but as a universal condition that makes us human, opens us to others, and teaches us to live with authenticity.

Fragility is not the opposite of strength but its foundation. Only those who recognise their own limits can truly build resources to face adversity. Acknowledging that we are not invincible allows us to seek help, embrace solidarity, and build connections. In this sense, fragility is a powerful engine of community: it reminds us that no one is self-sufficient and that well-being arises from interdependence rather than the illusion of autonomy.

Even more striking is the absence of choices related to words such as ableism, patriarchy, and assertiveness. These concepts, though essential to understanding the forms of discrimination that undermine well-being, were not perceived as central. In particular, several students interviewed after the crossword (13 in total) admitted that they did not know the meaning of the term assertiveness, revealing that there is still much work to be done to integrate into education the concepts that can strengthen relational skills and critical awareness.

In summary, the results highlight a dual need: on one hand, to cultivate personal resources such as determination, resilience, and self-esteem; on the other, to live in inclusive, ethical environments capable of nurturing hope. It is therefore clear that well-being cannot be reduced to mere individual adaptation, but must be understood as a dynamic balance between personal growth and the quality of collective life.

The environment in which one lives and studies is not neutral: it can act either as a barrier or as a facilitator of well-being and personal development. Universities, schools, and workplaces must therefore be designed as inclusive and open spaces, capable of fostering opportunities for all.

Furthermore, students must be enabled to develop a critical reading of reality, recognising inequalities and mechanisms of exclusion. This raises a crucial question: do current school and university programmes truly offer such opportunities? Education should not be limited to the transmission of knowledge, but must also nurture critical thinking, active citizenship, and social responsibility. This means that individual problems should never be interpreted in isolation, but understood in light of the social, cultural, and economic conditions that shape them.

Educational Implications

The results of this simple study provide valuable insights for the field of education and training. Firstly, they show the need to balance the emphasis on individual resources — such as determination, resilience, and self-esteem — with a constant focus on the social, relational and cultural factors influencing well-being. Teaching determination is important, but not sufficient: it is also necessary to develop a critical awareness of the structural constraints that limit growth opportunities.

Secondly, the importance attributed by young people to inclusion underscores the need for schools and universities to function as welcoming communities where everyone feels recognised, respected, and valued in their differences.

Equally significant is the fact that terms such as assertiveness, patriarchy, or ableism were little known or valued: this points to the urgency of integrating into educational curricula pathways that develop relational skills, sensitivity to power dynamics, and the ability to counter discrimination. Teaching students to communicate assertively, to recognise subtle forms of exclusion, and to deconstruct stereotypes represents a crucial investment in the future well-being of the new generations.

Finally, the limited attention to fragility invites a rethinking of the dominant educational rhetoric, often focused solely on strength and performance. Embracing fragility as a universal and constitutive dimension of the human condition can teach students to ask for help, to develop empathy, and to build supportive networks (university counselling services are designed precisely to welcome this fragility).

In summary, the educational implications of this study suggest that schools and universities should not merely be places for the transmission of knowledge, but spaces where well-being is cultivated as a shared responsibility, an inseparable link between personal growth and the quality of collective life.