The unique historical and cultural context of recent years, characterized by events such as the pandemic and the current conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, has highlighted the impact that current events can have on educational contexts (Reimers and Schleicher, 2020). Consequently, attention has been focused on how students interpret the uncertainties arising from an unstable situation (Commodari and La Rosa, 2021). Some studies have shown that it is not always easy for students to communicate their distress or openly discuss certain topics (Smorti, 2007; Guessoum et al., 2020), just as in other cases, current school personnel are not always inclined to address themes such as violence, war, and armed conflicts (Brock and Cowan, 2004; Vicari et al., 2022). It is also known that the pandemic has left lingering effects on some students, who were forcibly compelled to interrupt various social, educational, and sports activities (Loades et al., 2020; Lingiardi, 2021). When schools fail to address students’ emotions or distress, a rift can develop between the school context and that of daily life (Poulou, 2017; Moro, 2021; Zins et al., 2004). One of the tools available to schools to intercept student distress is certainly the role of the psychologist, who operates in schools in a recognized manner in most European contexts (Rens et al., 2018; Schleicher, 2018).

Analysis of studies in the literature has revealed that psychology in the school context has adapted and responded to the needs of the times: it has addressed the demand for social equality, issues related to psychotropic substance use and deviance, the phenomenon of school dropout, health promotion, and teacher training (Dentici, 1998).

In recent times, schools have primarily attributed to psychologists a merely emergency and sometimes curative function, with actions that involve treating established problems (Cornoldi and Molinari, 2019). Historically, interventions and methods typical of clinical psychology have prevailed, whose application was required for moments when urgency manifested.

The image of the psychologist that has been configured over time has been that of one “who should solve the problems of ‘discomfort,’ with interventions on individual cases or with group meetings with students or teachers” (Trombetta et al., 2008).

The focus of interventions and research has thus been directed towards particular and symptomatic situations of students in difficulty, and through their identification and evaluation, has concentrated on risk factors inherent to both health and dysfunctional behaviors such as bullying (Dentici, 1998; Menesini and Salmivalli, 2017). All this has led to neglecting all aspects concerning the “school” organization in the complex network of interactions in which it is embedded (Lucisano et al., 2018).

Subsequently, attention has been placed more on interactive processes involving the relationship between all roles involved (Capurso and Dennis, 2017; Mattioli, 2022), focusing on observing those dynamic processes that take place in the school context and are characterized by an interweaving of relationships, discourses, and meanings. This evolution has led to a more systemic view of the school psychologist’s role, as highlighted by Sheridan and Gutkin (2000), who emphasize the importance of considering the entire school ecosystem in psychological intervention practices. The school, therefore, has for several years been viewed not as a possible container for discomfort prevention interventions, but rather as an agent and promoter of well-being (Iudici, 2014).

Thus, alongside realities that operate on urgency, projects and interventions are being added that range from risk prevention to health promotion: there is a shift from a perspective of care, rehabilitation, and repair to a perspective of protection and safeguarding, to be implemented through information, increasing positive factors, and anticipating scenarios that may configure in a given context (Meyers and Meyers, 2003). Moreover, the emergency logic can be replaced only when stable connections are created in the territory, including social and health services, in which the school positions itself as an essential reality open to all citizens (Anderson-Butcher and Ashton, 2004).

As is known, Services are effective to the extent that they respond to precise user needs. A disconnect between Service and user needs creates dissatisfaction with the service or low use of the service, with consequent waste of resources. Also for this reason, we asked ourselves whether, in this period of uncertainty, the need to interact with a psychologist at school is changing. What image do students have of the psychologist at school? What might the needs be today? What requirements could be highlighted?

Specifically, the research objectives focused on how students configure the school psychology service, the role of the school psychologist, and their own role as users; on the needs, expectations, requests, and limitations that students place on the figure of the school psychologist and the modalities through which interaction with the latter can occur.

Contemporary Italian schools are facing a series of challenges and changes that reflect the social and cultural transformations of the country. One of the most evident aspects is the increasing multiculturalism of classrooms, a phenomenon that has taken root in recent decades. This demographic shift has necessitated a reevaluation of certain didactic practices and relational dynamics within classrooms (Santerini, 2010). Traditionally, the relationship between teachers and students has been based on a certain formality, although a more collaborative approach has been emerging recently. This period of change is not without challenges, as it requires a rethinking of the teaching role and didactic methodologies (Cavalli and Argentin, 2010).

A distinctive element of the Italian school system remains the emphasis placed on theoretical learning. While this aspect ensures a solid knowledge base, it has been criticized for potentially neglecting practical skills and soft skills (OECD, 2020a). The evaluation system, still predominantly based on numerical scales, is at the center of a debate on the opportunity to adopt more holistic approaches (Domenici, 2007).

A certainly innovative aspect of Italian schools is their approach to inclusivity, especially regarding students with disabilities. Italy has been a pioneer in this field, as documented by D'Alonzo (2008).

The role of the family in the Italian educational system is particularly significant and represents a distinctive characteristic of the country’s school culture. In many institutions, there exists a concept of “educational alliance” between school and family that is rooted in Italian culture. Indeed, parents tend to be very present in their children’s school life, and for some, this can increase student well-being and even school performance (Mantovani, 2012; Pati, 2019). At the same time, Italian families often have high expectations regarding their children’s academic success, which can also be a source of stress for students (Bonica and Sappa, 2010). These expectations also translate into learning support activities, as parents often invest time and resources in participation in extracurricular activities and projects (Gasperoni, 2013). Moreover, the weight of parents in influencing educational choices is decisive both in the choice of direction and with respect to the entire educational path (Colombo, 2017). In many cases, Italian parents play a significant role in mediating with families of immigrant origin, often taking on linguistic and managerial assistance (Santagati, 2015). Concurrently, this intense family involvement can lead to the creation of status differences between families from different social and cultural classes and also complicate the task of teachers who find themselves managing and balancing family demands with those of the school and institutions (Argentin, 2018).

Finally, the impact of academic stress on Italian students cannot be overlooked. Several studies have highlighted how levels of anxiety and stress related to school performance are particularly high among Italian students, raising important questions about psychological well-being in the educational context (Alivernini et al., 2019).

Regarding school psychology, Italy is currently the only European country that has not yet officially recognized the professional figure of the school psychologist, whose work is limited by the demands of the moment and the availability of resources. The lack of specific legislation, in fact, does not allow for clear references regarding the areas, methods of intervention, and evaluation of the effectiveness of the intervention. This historical moment thus offers us an opportunity to comprehensively delineate the complexity of the professional figure of the school psychologist and their work (Cornoldi and Molinari, 2021).

A survey (Istituto Piepoli, 2021) highlighted that 81% of the Italian population requests a psychologist at school, reaching 94% in the age range between 15 and 18 years. Among the fundamental activities, those most frequently indicated in the interviews were listening and support at 54%, prevention of discomfort at 41%, support for families at 29%, and consultation to the school system as a whole and support for teachers at 18%. Seven out of ten students between 15 and 18 years old preferred the term ‘listening and support’. This data denotes greater importance to students’ experiences regarding the school experience and the close links between these experiences and adaptation and success in the academic field. At present, there are some regional experiences, but there is no national law regulating activities, although at the experiential level, the presence of psychologists is very widespread in the role of occasional consultant.

The significant and representative positionings that emerged from the data analysis are situated along a continuum of interconnected and interdependent placements.

Among the interpretative repertoires that emerged from students’ descriptions of the professional figure in question, we first find that of “necessity.” As a common background to the narratives, a scenario was traced in which the school psychologist is primarily described as a fundamental professional figure, indispensable to students in the school context. These narrative modes highlight that the presented reality is taken for granted by students, and therefore does not require further verification beyond its mere presence. In this historical period, it simply exists as self-evident and indisputable factuality (Iudici et al., 2021). The perception of the school psychologist as a ‘necessary’ figure reflects a global trend towards greater attention to mental health in schools. This alignment with international practices is highlighted in studies such as that of Kutcher et al. (2016), which examined the integration of mental health in school systems across various countries.

Students have thus proposed a reality in which the psychologist’s intervention proves useful not only in particular situations where moments of impasse and suffering manifest, but especially in the moments of daily life that take place at school, which inevitably bring with them certain challenges. This data confirms the idea of expanding the role of the school psychologist in the school context (Albritton et al., 2019).

This thought assumes particular importance as an expression of an evolution in the conception of the school psychologist whose role, as previously stated, has often been limited to emergency situations (Sheridan and Gutkin, 2000). The emphasis on the role of the school psychologist in students’ daily lives, not just in crisis situations, reflects a paradigm shift observed at an international level. This preventive approach and promotion of well-being aligns with the World Health Organization’s recommendations for mental health in schools (WHO, 2021).

It is therefore fundamental to associate the figure of the psychologist at school not only with the management of difficulties, but also with the promotion of well-being and support for young people who, by nature, face a complex growth period.

Their involvement and full participation in the school system are therefore demanded, so that, thanks to their specific skills, they can closely know and observe the dynamics that unfold among the actors involved, to then propose tailored interventions that take into account, above all, the particular modes of interaction between participants.

Another significant metaphor that emerged is that of the “school psychologist as a source of help and support.” This configuration reveals an awareness of students’ need to be accompanied in their growth path by a figure who can guide and orient them, not only in their educational journey but also in managing the uncertainties and insecurities that arise in everyone’s life (Merrell et al., 2011).

The idea of the ‘school psychologist as a source of help and support’ reflects a global trend towards a more holistic approach to education, integrating emotional and social well-being with academic learning. This alignment is evident in the practices of many countries, such as those in Scandinavia, but also in some Asian countries, known for their innovative approaches to education (Sahlberg, 2015).

With the image of the “problem solver,” students attribute to the psychologist great responsibility and competence in bringing to light awareness regarding self-knowledge and knowledge of others. We can therefore affirm that it is essential to include in the professional’s mandate the sharing of responsibilities in the co-construction of growth paths, so that students themselves can become the architects of the world they inhabit and can, therefore, assume an active position that restores their autonomy and competence.

Through their narratives, students convey a message of suffering with respect to the typical dynamics of the society in which they are immersed, expressing the desire to reclaim their own value, interests, and vulnerabilities, and claiming the legitimization and constancy of the psychologist’s intervention in the school context.

This attitude is also shown in the contrast of stereotypes and prejudices that place limits on interaction with the school psychologist and in the need, therefore, for a change of perspective that can dismantle preconceived ideas of “healthy” or “sick,” which do not allow for experiencing the interaction with the professional figure in a serene, authentic, and genuine way. This data is also found in other research such as Corrigan (2016) and Smith & Applegate (2018). Addressing and dismantling stereotypes and biases associated with school psychologists is a widespread challenge across various cultural settings. Global research, including the work of Bahr et al. (2017), underscores the critical importance of tackling these barriers to enhance the impact of psychological interventions within educational environments.

The narrative repertoires also address stereotypes closely connected to the school psychologist as an adult figure, reporting the problematization of trust towards the latter.

The practiced theory is one in which the adult is associated with the inability to have empathy towards the younger generation and, therefore, the inability to grasp, without judgment, the experience of the young people with whom they interact. This could suggest a distorted mode of communication between young people and adults, laden with misunderstanding, which carries with it some implications, including the closure of the young person towards the adult, influencing the possibility of a request for help. This data confirms the need to better nurture the relationship between adults and students and their communications, as already supported by Sheridan and Garbacz (2022). This data also confirms the idea that such difficulties also arise with respect to a degree of formality present in Italian schools, as already revealed by Cavalli and Argentin (2010). The focus on the relationship between young people and adults and the need to improve communication are themes considered transversal across different cultural contexts. Research conducted in various countries, such as that of Thapa et al. (2013), emphasizes the importance of a positive school climate in fostering conditions for student well-being.

Another narrative repertoire presents the requester as a “strong,” “mature,” “intelligent,” “courageous,” “aware” person, thus through a series of qualities and characteristics that allow them to enter into a relationship with the school psychologist. While on one hand this modality confirms the need for a change of perspective, on the other, it anticipates possible scenarios that could evolve with respect to the modalities of requesting help. For the psychologist, it is therefore fundamental to keep these considerations in mind when designing interventions that take into account, for example, a possible lack of request for help in cases where the student might consider themselves “a person with little or no courage.”

In relation to students’ current needs, a characteristic element is the reference to the past, understood as a safety factor. Students, in fact, recall old habits to emphasize the uncertainty that derives from the continuous changes they must face. In a context where distance and insecurity about the future predominate, on one hand, there is a need to provide skills that students can use to face both their present and any unforeseen events; on the other hand, there is a need for a growth environment not only on the didactic and formative level but also on a personal level, as already reported by the OECD (2020b). The students’ request to be active protagonists in their growth journey and in decisions that concern them reflects a now global need that embodies a movement calling for greater student participation in educational processes. This aligns with certain practices known as ‘student voice’ promoted in many advanced educational systems (Mitra, 2018).

This would allow looking at the present as an opportunity to make space for oneself, one’s abilities and curiosities, and to build positive, satisfying, and fulfilling relationships.

The psychologist can respond to these requests by promoting a change in the structure and organization of the school environment, making it an open, inclusive space that, based on proximity, can grasp the meanings that participants attribute to the dynamics in which they are involved, and ultimately, offer students the possibility to be protagonists in the interactions they experience, and in the interventions and decisions that concern them.

The emphasis on the need to prepare students to face uncertainty and continuous social changes reflects a global concern in contemporary education. Various organizations have highlighted the importance of developing resilience and adaptability skills in students to address the challenges of the 21st century (OECD, 2018).

In the final analysis, the reading of positionings based on prescriptions reveals an attitude whereby students demand the figure of the psychologist, indicating and precisely establishing what the institution must do and how it must move to respond to this need. In this way, students claim and appeal to their right to health which, as defined by the WHO, corresponds to the ability to adapt and self-manage in the face of social, physical, and emotional challenges.

Indeed, a strong propensity and motivation is perceived on the part of students with respect to the intention to face the difficulties and problems identified firsthand.

Based on the emerged results, it is possible to conclude that the school psychologist is perceived as highly useful and as an indispensable professional figure to support students and other actors in the growth process that unfolds within the school context, bringing awareness to the processual nature of events and actions.

It has proven useful to give voice to students and their needs because only by bringing them to light can they be addressed and managed by the school system.

The research therefore directs its utility to professionals who intend to place their interest and/or carry out their work in the school context, providing important information on how to build an adequate and effective psychological service at school. Through the analysis of narratives and positionings, specifically, the school psychologist can propose intervention modalities that take into account the complexities that unfold through experiences, meanings, thoughts, needs, beliefs, and all the elements that constitute the dense network of interactions in which actors are involved. The work must be characterized by attention and respect for subjectivity through interventions that invite teachers, parents, and students to get in touch with their emotional and cognitive world in a game of mutual recognition that becomes knowledge of self and others.

The professional must therefore move along a continuum that ranges from support in specific situations of distress to promoting the well-being of the actors involved, positioning users’ needs in an expanded epistemological framework, and working on social representations related to the psychologist’s action and on expectations that come from students, parents, and school staff (Castelli, 2022).

School psychology must therefore be characterized by flexibility and versatility, and must aim to detect resources and skills, often already existing but not expressed in the school system. The image that derives from this modality is that of the psychologist as a “catalyst of processes,” who acts as a bridge and connects all the systems at play, making his work efficient thanks to the global perspective he assumes (Toso, 2021).

As American psychologist Robert Pianta (2001) has taught for years, the relationship represents the “keystone” of development and growth, both in typical conditions and in those of risk and vulnerability (Castelli, 2022).

Fundamental to fulfilling this task is the collaboration between the numerous participants in the school context, the possibility of exchanging points of view and reading the situations in which they are immersed: only in this way is it possible to propose different but effective activities for problems that are similar in content but not in the ways in which they manifest.

The research contributes by offering interesting elements that it is hoped can be taken into consideration for a clear and exhaustive definition of the role, work, and functions of the school psychologist.

The study also proves useful in making known the preeminent need to legitimize and regulate the figure of the school psychologist, through the development of an adequate regulatory framework of reference.