Social diversity in the 21st century is reflected in the diversity of families, including the social, economic, and societal resources (Bourdieu, 1992) available to them to educate and support their children. Internationally, it is well documented that the family is the earliest and most important educational setting for children and that the resources available play a central role in school success (Edelmann, 2018; Sylva et al., 2010). The family also has an impact on how children manage the transition from home to school and on their further educational pathways (Corsaro, 1996; Grasshoff et al., 2013; OECD, 2017).

Even though the right to equal educational opportunities is enshrined in the Swiss Federal Constitution, family background and educational trajectories are in Switzerland particularly closely linked compared to other European countries. The goal of equal educational opportunities for all children is thus far from being achieved (Edelmann et al., 2019).

In Switzerland, the issue of school entry has received renewed attention in recent years, as children have recently been required to start school at an earlier age. They now enter compulsory schooling at the age of four, which is rather unique in Europe. The first two years are known as kindergarten. After the second year, children move on to primary school. Bringing the starting age forward increases the age and developmental diversity in the classrooms. As a result, social and educational debates have arisen around the assumption that not all children are ready for school (Edelmann & Schletti, 2020; Edelmann et al., 2018).

Contrary to international research (Lareau, 2011; Vincent & Ball, 2006), studies in Switzerland have mainly focused on how less privileged children and their families, often with a migration background, cope with transitions. Empirical findings on how socially privileged Swiss families cope with transitions are largely lacking (Edelmann, 2018; Edelmann et al., 2019). However, we recognise such findings as an important basis for fully understanding and appropriately addressing processes and contexts that generate unequal educational opportunities at the time of school enrolment.

Against this background, the three researchers, responsible for this presentation, have developed a qualitative longitudinal study (Corsaro, 1996; Lareau, 2011; Witzel, 2010), that is financially supported by the Bern University of Teacher Education. Over a period of five years (2019 to 2023), the study examines the experiences and perspectives of five socially privileged Swiss families during two transitions of their first-born children. Data collection began six months before the children started school and continued until after the transition to primary school two years later. The main question of this study is: How do socially privileged Swiss families manage and experience the transition of their first-born child during the first transitions into and within the education system?

In this study, educational pathways are referred to as transitions. This makes it clear that they are complex life events that take place over a longer period and affect not only the child entering school, but also the entire family (Dockett, 2015; Niesel & Griebel, 2013).

The presentation will focus on insights into how socially privileged Swiss families experience and cope with the first two transitions of their first-born children into the education system. It will also show how the family's quality of education stimulation, everyday coping and attitudes changed in the context of the two transitions. The longitudinal perspective makes it possible to identify changes and continuities over time, thus contributing to a deeper understanding of the family's coping with the transitions. Finally, the findings will be discussed in terms of their relevance for the design of the school entry phase as well as for the training of teachers and education policy.

The empirical study is qualitative and longitudinal (Lareau, 2011; Witzel, 2010). It includes participating observations (Breidenstein et al., 2013) and problem-based interviews (Witzel, 2000). The data were collected in two phases, each lasting several months. They took place at the time of the first transition to school (= kindergarten) and two years later at the time of the second transition to primary school. An ethnographic approach (Breidenstein et al., 2013; Corsaro, 1996; Lareau, 2011) was chosen to study the family environment, consisting mainly of participating observations in the families. The observations took place at at least four points in time: twice before the children were entering kindergarten or primary school, immediately after entering kindergarten or primary school, and after a few weeks in kindergarten or primary school. The family observations usually lasted three to four hours and were protocolled. In addition, three qualitative problem-based interviews (Witzel, 2000) with a strong narrative focus were conducted with all parents in both phases of the study, so that individual activities and subjective perceptions could be captured. In particular, the interviews were used to gain insights that could not or could not fully be captured by participating observations. The first interview took place in spring, the second one just before the child started kindergarten or primary school, and the third in the autumn, after the child had entered kindergarten or primary school. The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed according to a transcription guide developed by the research team. Data analysis was carried out according to qualitative content analysis with the support of MAXQDA (Edelmann, 2018). For each family and survey phase, at least four observation protocols and three transcribed interviews were available after the research phase. The analysis of this data corpus was closely based on grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1996, 1998). In a first step, the available data per family and per survey phase were analysed using a multi-stage coding procedure. In a second step, the categories identified were compared across cases. From this, key categories relevant to each transition were derived. With the help of these key categories, it was possible to understand both the transition to kindergarten and the transition to primary school in a case-centred and case-comparative way across the five families. In addition, the longitudinal research design made it possible to compare the key categories identified across the two phases of the study.

It is clear from the available evidence that all five families can be described as informal educational settings in which social learning and school-like practices take place. The children are also offered a range of extra-curricular activities. It is also evident that parents negotiate social behaviour with their children and talk to them about values and norms. Interestingly, parents were most concerned about their children's ability to make friends and integrate socially in the classroom during the first transition to kindergarten. The way to school and the length of time spent at school also raised some concerns. It was not until the second transition to primary school that parents started to worry about whether their children will be able to cope with the demands of school. Despite the assumption, based on the available evidence of this study, that family resources should enable children to cope with the demands of school, individuals still experienced challenges in the transition process. In particular, children's social behaviour was criticised as being too independent. Also, not all children felt comfortable in their kindergarten or school. Similarly, school routines required all families to restructure their daily family routines. The surveys thus show that transitions are a challenge even for children from socially privileged families. They thus complement the existing evidence on children and families from less socially privileged backgrounds. Overall, the available evidence provides an important basis for designing the school entry phase. It addresses the question of how to design the school entry phase so that it is truly ready for all children and enables a successful start to school. As it has been empirically proven that successfully mastering the first transition has a positive effect on further transitions, this is to be understood as a ground-breaking goal that requires pedagogical and educational policy action.

Bourdieu, P. (1992). Die verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht. VSA. Boyle, T., Grieshaber, S., & Petriwskyj, A. (2018). An integrative review of transitions to school litera-ture. Educational Research Review, 24, 170-180. Breidenstein, G., Hirschauer, S., Kalthoff, H., & Nieswand, B. (2013). Ethnografie: Die Praxis der Feldforschung. UVK. Corsaro, W. A. (1996). Transitions in Early Childhood: The Promise of Comparative, Longitudinal Ethnography. In R. Jessor, A. Colby & R. A. Shweder (Ed.), Ethnography and Human Development (419-457). University of Chicago Press. Dockett, S. (2015). Starting school: A time of transition for families. In M. Urban, M. Schulz, K. Meser & S. Thoms (Ed.), Inklusion und Übergang. Perspektiven der Vernetzung von Kita und Grundschule (51-62). Julius Klinkhardt. Edelmann, D. (2018). Chancengerechtigkeit und Integration durch frühe (Sprach-)Förderung? Theoretische Reflexionen und empirische Einblicke. Springer. Edelmann, D., Beeler, K., Krienbühl, M., Schletti, C., & Bertschinger, F. (2019). Der Eintritt in die Schule – eine Chance für alle Kinder: Eine Studie im Auftrag der Jacobs Foundation. [online]. www.phbern.ch/transition Edelmann, D., & Schletti, C. (2020). Das typische Kindergartenkind aus Sicht der Kindergartenlehrpersonen. In E. Wannack & S. Beeli-Zimmermann (Ed.), Der Kindergarten im Fokus (31-37). hep. Edelmann, D., Wannack, E., & Schneider, H. (2018). Die Situation auf der Kindergartenstufe im Kanton Zürich. Eine empirische Studie im Auftrag der Bildungsdirektion des Kantons Zürich. [online]. www.phbern.ch/kindergartenstudie Grasshoff, G., Ulrich, H., Binz, C., Pfaff, A., & Schmenger, S. (2013). Eltern als Akteure im Prozess des Übergangs vom Kindergarten in die Grundschule. Springer. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. University of California Press. Niesel, R., & Griebel, W. (2013). Transitionen in der frühkindlichen Bildungsforschung. In M. Stamm & D. Edelmann (Ed.), Handbuch frühkindliche Bildungsforschung (285-296). Springer. OECD. (2017). Starting Strong V: Transitions from Early Childhood Education and Care to Primary Education. OECD Publishing. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1996). Grounded Theory: Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Beltz. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2010). Early Childhood Matters. Evidence from the Effective Pre-school and Primary Education Project. Routledge. Vincent, C., & Ball, S. (2006). Childcare, Choice and Class Practices: Middle-Class Parents and their Children. Routledge. Witzel, A. (2000). Das problemzentrierte Interview, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (1). Witzel, A. (2010). Längsschnittdesign. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Ed.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (290-303). VS.