Recent research on Covid-19 and adolescents as the School-Barometer (Huber et al., 2020), Juco (Andresen et al., 2020), or CorSJH (Jenkel, Günes, & Schmid, 2020) provided us with a basis for a further focus on the results in our interview study. As one of the first covid-19-related major studies, Huber et al., (2020) explored the experienced challenges for students in homeschooling such as a loss of motivation and difficulties in finding one’s daily structure.  

Having a look at certain conventional youth theories such as Capability Approach (Sen, 1993), Developmental Task Theory (Havighurst, 2003), Stages of Psychosocial Development (Erikson, 1973), Ambiguity Tolerance (Frenkel-Brunswik, 1949), Six-factor Model of Psychological Well-being (Ryff, 1995), we see that especially adolescents and young adults experience certain challenges to overcome whereas the question arises, how they dealt with the restrictions and changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

According to the Stages of Psychosocial Development after Erikson (1973), adolescents and young adults are coping in-between the two antipoles identity vs. identity diffusion (Stage V) as well as intimacy and solidarity vs. isolation (Stage VI). Young adults face different challenges which are defined as Developmental Tasks such as independence from their parents or the preparation to their transitions according to Havighurst (2003). According to Sen (1993), the Capability Approach as a theory of how life goals are achieved based on the individual realization opportunities builds a fundamental basis to successfully master the transitions. As Hurrelmann and Quenzel (2016) state, adolescents need a stable self-concept to be able to overcome these challenges. Moreover, factors such as self-efficacy and well-being are of relevance. Ryff structures well-being into six factors: 1.) self-acceptance, 2.) positive relations with other people, 3.) autonomy, 4.) environmental mastery, 5.) purpose in life, 6.) personal growth (Ryff, 1995, p.101). The results of the Covid-19-pandemic and the changes in political decisions demand high claims for ambiguity tolerance. The ambiguity tolerance is low when a situation is ignored or averted, whereas a high ambiguity tolerance means an active confrontation with the situation (e.g.: McLain et al.; 2015, Hirsh et al., 2012; Krappmann, 2000; Reis, 1997; Budner, 1962).  

Conducting an interview study with 23 17- to 20-year-olds from Germany, Austria and Switzerland and analyzing the data via qualitative content analysis after Mayring (2015) provided us with further insights into the experiences and coping strategies of young adults during crises. The results show that there were certain changes in several topic areas such as school, profession and transition, family, friends, politics, society or leisure. Furthermore, we saw differences between Germany, Austria and Switzerland: The interviewed adolescents from Germany and Austria test themselves regularly before they meet their friends. Furthermore, certain changes in friendship resulted from different ways of complying with the political measures. The dimension of the political decisions seems to be reflected in the opinions and the management of the young adults.  

This qualitative focus study of the School-Barometer draws on an interview design which includes about 23 semi-structured interviews with 17- to 20-year-olds from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. After being interviewed, some of them turned into multiplicators and independently interviewed their peers. This enabled young adults to be part of the research process and to have the most relaxed atmosphere possible by talking to their peers. Thus, this could lead to a higher validity of the data since a high conversation flow during the interview situation is probable. As Lile states, it is crucial to involve adolescents into the research process when the study is about adolescents. The data was investigated through qualitative content analysis after Mayring (2015). The qualitative content analysis aims at abstracting and thematically structuring the statements. Therewith, the several topic areas represented the deductive codes and further inductive sub-codes in each area were structured. As a further goal of the qualitative content analysis, theses should result from the findings. Thus, after coding and discussing the data, theses and recommendations for practice were derived. Data sources include interview data among 17-to 21-year-olds from Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The research group conducted 11 interviews with male and female young adults. By following the principle of variance maximization (Patton, 2002), the sample differs in gender, place of residence (DE-AT-CH; rural or urban), and the individual transition situation (before or after graduation; school or working environment). The criteria-controlled case selection enables achieving a great heterogeneity (Kelle & Kluge, 1999, p.39).

In addition to the findings of previous major surveys, through qualitative research, further contextual experiences as well as the changes in individual management could be explored. The conducted interview study enables us to understand the experiences of young adults over a period of time from consulting their narrative perspectives. It is interesting that the addressed challenges concern all six elements of Ryff’s Psychological Well-being Model (1995): Instead of self-acceptance some adolescents developed self-doubts the experience of positive relations to other people was noticeably reduced and affected by conflicts the autonomy was highly restricted by parents and politics the constant changes and ambiguities in the political decisions led to insecurities in environmental mastery the missing preparation events impeded dealing with their own life goals there were differences in personal growth – positive changes as higher self-reflection and negative changes as the feeling of having stagnated Furthermore, as of the Stages of Psychosocial Development after Erikson (1973), coping in-between the two antipoles identity vs. identity diffusion (Stage V) as well as intimacy and solidarity vs. isolation (Stage VI) were demanding challenges as during the Covid-19-pandemic, solidarity suddenly meant keeping distance. Comparing the findings between the three countries, it is noticeable that the dimension of the political decisions seems to be reflected in the opinions and the management of the young adults. In general, the young adults faced changes in all topic areas. It can be held that well-being, as of the definition of Ryff (1995), was affected and long-term reductions in academic achievement is a worry for certain adolescents. These findings, in addition to the challenged psychosocial development, shows the need for action. Hence, this paper discusses the theses as well as the derived recommendations for school and educational politics.

Andresen, S., Lips, A., Rusack, T., Schröer, W., Thomas, S., & Wilmes, J. (2020). Erfahrungen und Perspektiven von jungen Menschen während der Corona-Massnahmen. Erste Ergebnisse der bundesweiten Studie JuCo. Hildesheim: Universitätsverlag Hildesheim. Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29-50. Erikson, E. (1973). Identität und Lebenszyklus. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1949). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of personality. Havighurst, R.J. (2003): Developmental tasks and education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hirsh, J. B., Mar, R. A., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). Psychological entropy: a framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety. Psychological Review, 119(2), 304-320. Huber, S. G., Günther, P. S., Schneider, N., Helm, C., Schwander, M., Schneider, J. A., & Pruitt, J. (2020). COVID-19 und aktuelle Herausforderungen in Schule und Bildung. Erste Befunde des Schul-Barometers in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. Münster; New York: Waxmann. Hurrelmann, K., Quenzel, G. (2016): Lebensphase Jugend. Eine Einfuhrung in die sozialwissenschaftliche Jugendforschung (13. Aufl.). Beltz Juventa. Jenkel, N., Günes, S.C., Schmid, M. (2020): „Die Corona-Krise aus der Perspektive von jungen Menschen in der stationären Kinder- und Jugendhilfe (CorSJH), Erste Ergebnisse. Basel/ Zürich Sep. 2020. https://www.integras.ch/ images/aktuelles/2020/20200902_CorSJH_ Kelle, U. & Kluge, S. (1999). Vom Einzelfall zum Typus.Fallvergleich und Fallkontrastierung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. [8 Absätze]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), Art. 39 Krappmann, L. (2000). Soziologische Dimensionen der Identität : Strukturelle Bedingungen für die Teilnahme an Interaktionsprozessen (9. Aufl.. ed., Veröffentlichung des MaxPlanck-Instituts für Bildungsforschung). Klett-Cotta. Mayring, Philipp (2015): Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. 12.,überarb. Aufl. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz. McLain, D. L. (2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale-II (mstat-II). Psychological Reports, 105, 975–988. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current directions in psychological science, 4(4), 99-104. Sen, A. (1993) ‘Capability and well-being’, in M. Nussbaum and A. Sen (Eds), The Quality of Life, Clarendon Press, Oxford.