Transitions from life-course perspective

Research on school to work transitions has, for a large part, been covered by the life-course approach due to its focus on time, place and biography. Life-course research takes a particular perspective on the timing and ordering of events in the life span by looking at 'social pathways' and 'life patterns and their dynamics in time' (Elder et al. 2003: 7). The notion of life course can be defined as:

'Historically variable – socio-culturally and politically constructed institution that produces societal continuity and social integration through structurally embedded sequences of age-related status configurations, which refer to individuals’ societal participations and orient (but do not determine) biographical action. Life courses establish opportunity structures for self-realisation as well as patterns of rules ordering the temporal dimensions of social life' (Wingens and Reiter 2011: 189).

Thereby, the issue of timing and social changes in relation to specific age periods is at the center of the approach. The recent developments around life course imply its conceptualization as an 'institution of socialization in its own right and a central unit in social structure' (Richard and Settersten 2002: 15).

This is what brought forward the importance of age and time in pacing and structuring of life as well as rules and regulations in the society. A parallel development to this chronology (Kohli 1986) introduces institutionalization as the growing importance of the state, organization and institution in regulating the life

course (Richard and Settersten 2002). The institutions shape and mold individual transitions, historical change and structural opportunities as well as the functioning of individual agency within the context of these opportunities (Elder 1998, Schoon and Silbereisen 2009).

Youth as a life phase has an essential place and growing importance in life-course research, which can be related to effects brought along by globalization and its causes in economic and social structures. Since transitional pathways of young people are largely dependent on opportunities and constraints provided within the socio-historical and economic context, these developments have special consequences for young people's transitions (Schoon and Silbereisen 2009). The most relevant changes in life courses can be derived from the emergence of high youth unemployment rates starting from the mid-1970's (du Bois-Reymond and Chisholm 2006). As a consequence, structural changes in terms of greater flexibility of the labor market offering part-time and temporary jobs led to an increase in the vulnerability of the young people (e.g. du Bois-Reymond and Chisholm 2006, Schoon and Silbereisen 2009). Other relevant factors have been derived from the globalization of work, the de-industrialization of Western economies and the spread of ICT (Bradley and Devadason 2008).

These changes were further followed by increased prolongation of educational pathways and by alternations between education, training and work, which are claimed to subject the young to higher risks of social exclusion (Walther and Plug 2006).

As a consequence of these changes, the focus in the field of life-course research shifted towards questioning the traditional life course and introducing transitions in the light of 'modern' life course (Brückner and Mayer 2005). Such theories propose changes in the structure and timing of the new life courses.

First of all, the current transitions have been conceptualized as 'yo-yo' transitions describing the diversification of individual pathways increasingly characterized by reversible steps taken in the career path (EGRIS 2001; Pais 2003; Biggart and Walther 2006). Common to such transitional pathways are periods of unemployment, education and work without the predestined order more characteristic of traditional transitions. Thereby, transitions are presented as non-linear, which shows a development away from constructing transitions as standardized and predictable. A comparison is often made between the Fordist era characterized by linear passages and the current state of affairs defined as unstandardized, unstable and insecure (e.g. Walther 2009). When it comes to labor market integration, the question of linearity of trajectories comes down to success and failure emphasizing linear transitions as a sign of a successful transition to employment (Heinz 1999, Shanahan 2000). However, in the field of life-course research, the importance of integrating all the different perspectives of transitions is promoted in order to avoid the simplistic view of reducing them to successful or failed transitions (Walther 2009).

Secondly, the post-modern life courses are described as extended and lengthened when compared to the traditional ones (e.g. Furlong and Cartmel 1997, Wallace and Kovatcheva 1998). This is due to the extension of compulsory schooling and post-compulsory education (Vinken 2003, Walther 2006) as well as longer time periods taken to settle down and create professional plans and more time devoted to 'occupational profile-building' by

trying out different occupational roles and gaining job experiences (Bynner 2007).

Thirdly, individualization has been a concept widely related to life courses. In addition to life-course studies, sociological research on late modernity scrutinizes the trends towards individualization from the perspective of risk and institutionalization. Theoretical work related to the concept has for a large part been done by sociologists such as Anthony Giddens (1991), Ulrich Beck (e.g.

1992, Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 2002), Richard Sennett (1998) and Zygmunt Bauman (2001). Hence, current transitions are characterized by an increasing variety of choice and youth cultures described as signs of individualization of pathways (e.g. Walther and Plug 2006). Such theories bring forward the increasing focus on individual decisions and agency (du Bois-Reymond 1998, Macmillan 2007, Walther 2009) and the following positioning of the young people as responsible for making decisions and for the outcomes of those decisions (Walther 2009).

The individualization trends and the scrutiny of its impact on young people bring along the need to focus on issues such as identity and biography. The changes in the labor market and economy entail new opportunities and challenges for the young people along with new ways of self-identification. These opportunities for reformulation of identities signal the change to seeing the construction of the self as a 'reflexive project' (Giddens 1991). Globalization demands for constant flexibility and adaptability through the processes of individualization and biographization (Walther 2006). The latter concept refers to the reflexive process whereby the individual’s life course is constructed through biographical processes of choice making (Vinken 2007). The increased autonomy of the individuals for creating their identities entails that they have to and are allowed to decide for themselves while projecting for their futures. The challenge is to constantly balance between external demands and subjective interests to create a coherent biography of lived experiences (Pohl et al. 2006). Following this theme, some authors write about 'biography of choice' or 'choice biography' (Beck 1992, du Bois-Reymond 1998) when referring to the demands for self-reflection, weighing alternatives and coordinating the outcomes of one's choices.

Others address the risks faced by young people by using the term 'risk biography' when making choices with unknown consequences (Furlong and Cartmel 1997).

Hence, the 'de-ritualization' of the post-modern life courses demands for reflexivity, exploration of the self and reconstruction of the biography along the social changes that bring along opportunities and constraints (Heinz 2002). In the context of the labor market, work can be seen as a tool for successful self-definition and for the construction of a coherent biography. It provides the means for continuity and change and the source for identity and competence. In the case of young people, this is connected to the importance of education as a modifier of the process of identity building (Settersten and Owens 2002). The meanings brought by the welfare state developments towards activation promote and encourage identity construction through work. Such meanings introduce the idea of career identity by promoting personal adaptability and flexibility (Fugate et al. 2004, Weichold 2009). Work and employment can be said to have an important role as an organizer of life course as well as in socialization and

integration (Heinz 2002). Due to this role, issues such as long-term unemployment and what are considered as periods of inactivity can easily be equaled to social exclusion and marginalization. This particularly applies to young people that often lack professional experience.