Introduction

In Germany, students must acquire specific school-leaving certificates in order to enter postsecondary education at the college/university level (“higher education”). This access to higher education has been broadened over the last decades, with several alternative routes leading to the necessary certificates. However, the highest and most attractive school-leaving certificate is still the Abitur that provides access to the greatest range of higher education. In fact, the Abitur occupies the central role, and 81% of the freshmen in Germany possess this qualification (at universities: 97%; Heine et al. 2008). The majority of young adults acquire their Abitur at the upper secondary level of a Gymnasium. Consequently, the main focus of this chapter is on this institution.

The organization of the upper secondary academic track education, the curriculum that should be implemented, as well as the characteristics of the upper secondary school-leaving certificate, the Abitur, have always played a major role in scientific, political, and public discussions about the school system. Because it opens up access to a highly attractive range of careers for a selected group of students, the upper secondary academic track education and the Abitur have been the subject of several long-standing political and scientific debates (Baumert et al. 2003; Huber 2004; Köller et al. 2004; Trautwein et al. 2007, 2010a; Trautwein and Neumann 2008). To name but three: What role does social background play in predicting who will acquire the Abitur and in Abitur students’ decisions for or against attending university? Are the subject- and competency-related standards appropriate (in view of the quality of preuniversity education)? How predictive are achievement levels at the Abitur for later success at university and in the job market? Unfortunately, up to now, there has been no systematic nationwide empirical monitoring and evaluation of the upper secondary level that would give scientifically sound answers to these and other questions.

The German Gymnasium is currently undergoing two important transformations (see Trautwein and Neumann 2008). First, many states have recently reformed the curriculum and organization of upper secondary schooling with the aim to increase the common knowledge basis for all students. The reforms have brought a substantial reduction of choice options (e.g., advanced course choices) with the aim of homogenizing the curriculum experienced by all students. Second, in recent years, most German states have implemented an 8-year (G8) in place of the 9-year (G9) Gymnasium system. Therefore, students who do not repeat any years will graduate with Abitur after 12 rather than 13 years. Such reforms may cause cohort effects in outcomes and students’ educational biographies and are thus highly relevant for the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS).

In the present chapter, we shall give an overview of work in the so-called stage 5 of NEPS and its linkage to the NEPS-pillars and the adjacent stages (for the framing concept of NEPS see Chap. 1, this volume). We start with an overview of prior empirical studies of the upper secondary level in Sect. 15.2. This will clearly reveal the need for a project such as NEPS. In Sect. 15.3, we shall then describe a number of unresolved general research questions revolving around the upper secondary level. Although the research instruments developed for NEPS are very broad, these guiding questions translate into elements of their implementation. The major elements of the research instruments are described in some more detail in Sect. 15.4. Over the last couple of years, there have been major changes in academic track education in many German states, and Sect. 15.5 describes how these changes and their consequences for the interpretation of NEPS data are reflected in the NEPS data collections.

Systematic empirical studies of upper secondary education

There have been several empirical studies focusing on or including upper secondary education in Germany over the last decades, some of which have been quite influential in terms of their scientific or policy impact (see also Chap. 3, this volume). The description of the studies will highlight some of their accomplishments. However, all these studies suffer from at least one of three major shortages, highlighting the urgent need for the NEPS. First, some studies are cross-sectional only—they do not cover the path into upper secondary education and the transition to higher education or the job market. Second, some large-scale studies focus on only one German state or a restricted number of states. Third, several studies do not include standardized achievement measures. In the following, we shall give a short description of some of the studies that have had some impact on the discourse about upper secondary education.

Designed as a household panel study, the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) provides an important database for educational research (Lohmann et al. 2009). Starting in 1984 with a sample at the household level, each member of the household as well as their offspring should be followed for as long as possible (Wagner et al. 2007). For research on educational participation and transitions in educational biographies, for instance, such data are highly valuable. Unfortunately, the SOEP does not provide standardized achievement measures (since 2006, however, general cognitive ability is being assessed by standardized tests; Schupp et al. 2008).

The German Life History StudyFootnote 1 (GLHS; Lebensverläufe und gesellschaftlicher Wandel) conducted by Karl Ulrich Mayer, started in 1979 with funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG; Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft), and has been continued at the Max Planck Institute of Human Development and Education in Berlin and the Center for Research on Inequalities and the Life Course (CIQLE) at Yale University. The following cohorts were assessed (Hillmert et al. 2004; Solga 1996; Wagner 1996) in western Germany (including West Berlin): 1919–1921, 1929–1931, 1939–1941, 1949–1951, 1954–1956, 1959–1961, 1964, and 1971. The eastern German cohorts include 1929–1931, 1939–1941, 1951–1953, 1959–1961, and 1971. The major focus of the GHLS is on investigating social conditions before, during, and after German reunification, and it provides retrospective life-course information on, for instance, the family of origin, residential history, education, and work life. Because there have been several changes in the German educational system since the last birth cohorts of this study left school, more recent data are needed. The study also lacks academic achievement measures, and few instruments permit examinations of psychological characteristics associated with different educational biographies.

With the international comparison based on data from a total of 24 participating countries, the large-scale, representative Third International Mathematics and Science Study, Population III (TIMSS; Baumert et al. 2000) has been very influential. Three different competence areas were assessed (although some countries did not participate in all areas): mathematics and science literacy (22 countries), advanced mathematics (17 countries), and physics (18 countries). The international comparison showed that German students attained only average results in mathematics and science literacy despite their rather high mean age (19.5 years) compared to final school year students from other countries. With regard to college-preparatory education—the academic track—German students’ mathematics as well as physics achievement lay in the average range of international results. TIMSS can be seen as the starting point for increasing interest in the use of standardized achievement tests to monitor the effectiveness of a school system. Unfortunately, no longitudinal component was included in this study.

A longitudinal study conducted in Hamburg (LAU; Aspekte der Lernausgangslage und der Lernentwicklung; see Lehmann et al. 2006; Trautwein et al. 2007) is unique, because it traced students from the first year of lower secondary education up to their last year of upper secondary education. Using standardized achievement tests in several school subjects, LAU provided unprecedented insights into individual development and the trajectories of achievement in different school types. For instance, with regard to the upper secondary level, there were large differences between different school types: Students in Gesamtschule, Aufbaugymnasium (a special school type leading to Abitur for students from Realschule), and Wirtschaftsgymnasium (upper secondary vocational school of economics) scored considerably lower on the mathematical literacy and advanced mathematics tests compared to students in the traditional Gymnasium and the Technisches Gymnasium (Gymnasium with a technical focus). Unfortunately, LAU collected only a limited set of variables shedding light on characteristics of the students and their families that might help to explain the variability in educational biographies. Furthermore, the study was restricted to Hamburg alone.

The longitudinal Learning Processes, Educational Careers, and Psychosocial Development in Adolescence and Young Adulthood Study (BIJU; Bildungsverläufe und psychosoziale Entwicklung im Jugendalter) traced students’ development from Grade 7 up to the transition to either higher or vocational education. Data from students in two eastern German states, one western German state, and Berlin (East and West) were collected at the start of the unification of the East and West German school systems, in which the East German school system was largely transformed into the existing West German system. BIJU yielded several important findings. For instance, it showed that the school achievement of students with identical school-leaving certificates differed greatly depending on the state they lived in and the school type attended. Furthermore, research based on the BIJU dataset documented how the composition of the learning environment has a lasting impact on psychosocial outcomes (e.g., Marsh et al. 2007), showed the reciprocal association between achievement and self-related cognitions (e.g., Trautwein et al. 2006a), and documented that gender effects on course selections in upper secondary education (biology and mathematics in Grade 12) can be explained fully by differences in achievement, self-concept, and intrinsic value (see Nagy et al. 2006). However, a central limitation of BIJU is the restriction to only four German states.

The multicohort longitudinal Transformation of the Secondary School System and Academic Careers Study (TOSCA; Köller et al. 2004; Trautwein et al. 2007) is currently the largest ongoing research project focusing on the transition to higher education and the job market. Several thousand Grade 10 and Abitur students in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg participated in school achievement tests and answered a student questionnaire focusing on their school biography, their family background, various psychological characteristics, and their plans for their future. The central limitation of the TOSCA dataset is its restriction to Baden-Wuerttemberg, a state whose school system and higher education system differ in several respects from those of other states.

The Studienberechtigte study (Hochschul-Informations-System; HIS), which started in 1976, in the school year 2004/2005 for the first time was supplemented by an additional assessment half a year before students reach their qualification for higher education (university of applied sciences, university) (Heine et al. 2005; Heine and Willich 2006). The second assessment, as usual in the Studienberechtigte study, took place half a year after students left school. A central aim of the study was to validate the prognostic potential of students’ intentions to enroll at a university or a university of applied sciences. The results yielded that 88% of the students who had planned to start higher education studies after school were enrolled at a university or a university of applied sciences, or still adhered to their plans half a year after school. Only 8% of the students had revised, and 5% of the respondents had become unsure about their intention to start higher education studies. The limitations to this dataset include the omission of standardized achievement tests.

In summary, each of the existing studies suffers from at least one major limitation (cross-sectional nature, omission of standardized achievement tests, limited scope in terms of regional outreach). Because of the restricted data situation, many questions of major educational and political interest cannot be answered. The NEPS will provide a more comprehensive as well as a more detailed picture of educational careers in Germany than the studies mentioned above.

Key research areas

There are many unresolved general research questions revolving around the upper secondary level and its linkages to the other NEPS stages. Clearly, empirical work with the NEPS dataset will generate many research questions and answers that did not cross the minds of those responsible for designing the study right from the outset. In fact, the research instrument developed for NEPS is purposefully quite broad, so that it can accommodate in questions that were not evident when the design and the variables were determined. Nevertheless, several key questions are guiding the development of the final instrument, and we shall describe four of these guiding questions in more detail.

Traditional and nontraditional pathways to the Abitur

The majority of students still receive their Abitur certificate from traditional Gymnasium schools. In recent decades, however, many German states have introduced alternative institutional structures that lead to higher education, including Gesamtschulen and vocational Gymnasien. The data collected in NEPS (see the contributions of the pillars and stage 4, Chaps. 5–9 and 14, this volume) will considerably improve our understanding of the interplay of different factors predicting these pathways. What is currently known about these alternative paths to higher education and what is not?

With respect to achievement differences (see also pillar 1, Chap. 5, this volume), the small body of existing data seems to imply differences in students’ academic achievement between traditional and nontraditional Gymnasium (Trautwein et al. 2007). These seem to be mostly due to different school careers of the students on traditional and nontraditional pathways to Abitur before Secondary Level II (Köller et al. 1999).

In terms of social disparities (see also pillar 3, Chap. 7, this volume), it is still unclear whether opening up new paths to higher education results in increased or decreased social disparities. Based on data from the TOSCA project, Watermann and Maaz (2006) found a considerably lower sociocultural background for vocational versus traditional Gymnasium students. This may indicate a positive effect of the nontraditional pathways to higher education. In a comparative study with data from 13 countries (including Germany), Blossfeld and Shavit (1993) found the effect of social selectivity to be highest at the first transition from elementary school, and then it declined for later transitions (except in Switzerland). This result was also confirmed by a (West) German longitudinal study (Education, Training, and Occupation: Life Courses of the 1964 and 1971 Birth Cohorts in West Germany; Hillmert et al. 2004) drawing on data from the 1964 birth cohort until age 40 (Hillmert and Jacob 2010). However, Hillmert and Jacob (2005, 2010) also found that the relative advantage of students with a higher educational background increased at each stage in their educational careers. Additionally, the study showed the importance of a longitudinal perspective on the process of educational attainment: Besides the ideal-typical sequence of academic track transitions (elementary school—[traditional] Gymnasium—Abitur—higher education—attainment of a university degree), many alternative pathways exist (e.g., second chance education, later entry or reentry to university).

There is now strong evidence showing that students with a migration background (see also pillar 4, Chap. 8, this volume) are underrepresented in preuniversity tracks (e.g., Avenarius et al. 2003), but this relative disadvantage seems to vary across different states (e.g., Trautwein et al. 2007). Moreover, there may be differences in the achievement levels of students with and without migration background, and the decisions regarding further education (e.g., attending university vs. starting an apprenticeship) might be associated with migration status.

In order to provide adequate answers to research questions concerning traditional and nontraditional pathways to the Abitur, a complex study design is required. The major limitation of present studies is their lack of a “complete picture”. NEPS is designed to overcome these limitations. Central research questions concerning the different pathways to the Abitur include:

  • Are the levels of academic achievement comparable across different school types with academic tracks at the beginning and at the end of the gymnasiale Oberstufe?

  • Are the nontraditional pathways to Abitur attractive alternatives to the traditional Gymnasium, in particular, for students from less favorable social backgrounds or with migration backgrounds? Do they decrease social disparities or even increase them?

Which competencies do Abitur students possess?

The competencies of students at the end of their school careers have been a cause of concern for many years (e.g., Deidesheimer Kreis 1997; Heine et al. 2008; Heublein et al. 2003). Are they well-prepared for higher education? Do they possess the necessary cognitive and noncognitive competencies for entering an apprenticeship? How important are formal and nonformal/informal learning environments for the development of the different competencies (see Chap. 9, this volume)?

In the context of the NEPS, the conceptualization described in pillar 1 (see Chap. 5, this volume) will be implemented at the upper secondary education level. Thus, a broad conceptualization of competencies based mainly on four clusters (domain-general cognitive functions, domain-specific cognitive competencies, metacompetencies/personality, and stage-specific competencies) will be used. The systematic assessment of core competencies will help close evident research gaps and provide important data for an efficient monitoring of the German school system. Possible research questions include:

  • How strong are differences in the achievement levels across different pathways to the Abitur?

  • Have students acquired the skills and strategies they will need at university, the readiness to adopt a science-oriented approach in everyday life, and an understanding of the limits of human understanding (Huber 1997)?

  • What is the personality profile of successful Abitur students?

Social disparities at the transition to higher education

Specific emphasis should be given to the association between family background and the options taken up at the post-Abitur transition. There is consensus in educational and social structure research that social inequality in educational participation emerges primarily at points of transition in the education system (Breen and Goldthorpe 1997; Schnabel et al. 2002). These transitions reflect the cumulative effects of previous educational decisions: the earlier educational choices have to be made, the more sustained the effects of social disparities (Shavit and Blossfeld 1993); the later in the educational career these decisions are made, the weaker the effects of social disparities (Mayer et al. 2007). Social disparities in access to higher education can be expected to be smaller, but they may still be of meaningful size (Hillmert and Jacob 2010).

The effect of secondary social disparities at university entrance has been studied mainly by examining the university aspirations of students with Abitur. Based on BIJU data, Schnabel et al. (2002) showed that the intention to enter university increases 1.5-fold when one parent holds the Abitur rather than a lower school certificate. Similarly, analyses with the TIMSS data (Schnabel and Gruehn 2000) showed that parents’ highest educational qualification had a positive effect on university intentions after controlling for students’ school performance. However, the effect of the educational milieu at home clearly decreased after controlling for the perception of parents’ university expectations. This shows that the university aspirations of young adults develop in the context of their parents’ expectations, and that these differ according to the social status of the family. Using the TOSCA dataset, Maaz (2006) showed that social class had only a small effect on participation in higher education (see also Watermann and Maaz 2006). However, there were differences in the type of university selected by students from different familial backgrounds. Students with Abitur from a privileged familial background were more likely than their peers with less favorable backgrounds to select university (rather than a university of applied sciences, college of education, or vocational academy; Maaz 2006; Trautwein et al. 2006b; Watermann and Maaz 2004).

Watermann and Maaz (2010) examined which mechanisms mediate the association between social background and the decision to enter higher education. As a decision model, Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior was adapted to the transition to higher education. Based on this theory, (a) attitudes to higher education, (b) the perceived expectations of the social background with respect to higher education, and (c) perceived behavioral control in terms of students’ confidence in their ability to enter and succeed in higher education can be considered to be the key determinants of intention to study. Drawing on data from a subsample of participants in the TOSCA study, a decision model was specified for the analysis of secondary background effects, and the transition to higher education was analyzed from a longitudinal perspective. Moreover, the effects of social background were found to be mediated by the indicators of the decision model.

Questions pertaining to social disparities in access to higher education have always been of interest in social research, and they gain additional relevance in the current context of reform in the tertiary sector. For instance, relevant research questions include:

  • How large are social disparities in access to higher education?

  • Do these disparities differ for the different types of higher education?

  • What are the effects of the introduction of tuition fees on social disparities?

Achievement, school grades, and certificates: predicting further development?

Of course, one highly relevant research field to which NEPS will add knowledge is the issue of long-term returns to education (see pillar 5, Chap. 9, this volume). In this chapter, we shall focus on only one small subaspect: the relative predictive power of various indicators of achievement.

Prior research has documented that school achievement collected via standardized achievement tests correlates only moderately with teacher-assigned school grades or cognitive ability (Baumert et al. 2003; Ingenkamp 1969). This—and the increasing role of the university in the admission of students to highly valued study subjects—opens up a multitude of important research questions. A good final school grade gives students access to highly valued fields of study in which slots are assigned—at least in part—on the basis of the Abitur grade. When predicting a successful transition to vocational training or university (see stages 6 and 7, Chaps. 16 and 17, this volume), the NEPS will be able to examine the role of school type attended, type of school-leaving certificate acquired, basic cognitive abilities, school achievement in the standardized school achievement tests, and teacher-assigned school grades. Which indicator is of special importance for a successful transition to university or the labor market (Nagy 2006)?

Modern educational systems rely on the assumption that competence levels predict future success in higher education and in the vocational field. However, it has also been argued (e.g., Solga 2005) that employers rely heavily on the type of school-leaving certificate as a “signal” (Spence 1973) when taking on apprentices or hiring employees. The same might be true for universities. There is some reason to believe that—due to their easy availability for employers and admission boards—school-leaving certificates and school grades will have a more pronounced effect on students’ success in the application process, whereas, in contrast, competencies and abilities predict success during university, vocational training, or the occupational career. However, as plausible as this reasoning may be, there is a need for studies that empirically separate the confounding effects of certificates and competence levels in the short and long run. Moreover, there is a need to differentiate between various facets of cognitive abilities. Several studies from the United States seem to indicate that general ability plays a more important role for training success than basic competencies or specific abilities (e.g., Ree and Earles 1991). However, convincing empirical support for such a pattern of results is largely lacking in the German context.

One exception is the analysis of the TOSCA database by Nagy (2006). He used a broad set of variables assessed at the end of secondary schooling to predict success at university two years later. His analyses showed that grade point average (GPA), cognitive abilities, and school achievement test scores were all related to achievement in university. In the total sample, only GPA and cognitive abilities exerted significant effects, whereas school achievement measures had no incremental predictive power. However, Nagy (2006) also found that math test scores had a substantial predictive power for students entering math-intensive fields of study (e.g., engineering). These findings indicate that an examination of individual factors such as competencies (basic cognitive abilities, achievement, study-related competencies), vocational interest, motivation, and long-term plans should be complemented by the investigation of contextual factors (e.g., specific university types and subjects and type of vocational training).

Hence, some relevant research questions that may be addressed using the NEPS dataset include:

  • What indicators are most important in predicting long-term outcomes?

  • To what extent does this prediction model differ when looking at different study fields or jobs?

Instruments

In line with the longitudinal design of NEPS, the majority of the instruments administered to students included in the NEPS for 9th graders in 2010 will be the upper secondary versions of the standard instruments used throughout the school career (for the constructs to be used, see the contributions of the pillars and stage 4, Chaps. 5–9 and 14, this volume). However, some additions and refinements will be necessary to cover specific aspects of upper secondary education in the preuniversity track.

Wissenschaftspropädeutik. A specific focus will be on study skills and critical and scientific thinking. These are subsumed under the heading Wissenschaftspropädeutik in the German educational literature. Self-report measures (see Heine 2002; Trautwein and Lüdtke 2004) as well as “tests” of critical and scientific thinking (e.g., Krettenauer 2005) have been used, but much work is needed to improve and enrich these instruments. We aim to use a more comprehensive measure of Wissenschaftspropädeutik, and the pilot testing phase of the NEPS will be used to validate this measure. Provided the development and validation process is successful, the measure should be implemented in higher-education-bound student samples of the NEPS as soon as possible.

English as a foreign language. Because English is the lingua franca (see Tenorth 2001) of today’s scientific world, and, due to ongoing globalization processes, essential in many relevant areas of career and everyday life (e.g., economy, modern communication in the “global village”), there will be an additional assessment of English-language skills at the end of higher-education-bound upper secondary education. Moreover, English is by far the most common second language for German school students (in 2007, 80% of students in German schools were taking English lessonsFootnote 2).

Stage-specific questions about educational and vocational choices. A battery of student questionnaires focusing on the transition to university or vocational training will have to be used. The instruments used in the TOSCA study (Köller et al. 2004) as well as instruments developed in cooperation with stages 6 and 7 (see Chaps. 16 and 17, this volume) will provide the main source for this questionnaire.

Documenting the effects of the recent abitur reforms: systematic assessment of core competencies under changing institutional conditions

The focus of NEPS is on individual development in the context of institutionalized and noninstitutionalized learning environments. For this reason, NEPS examines how schooling influences the lives of children and adults and how differences in school experiences translate into various outcomes. At the same time, the longitudinal nature of the study is of utmost importance, and not all variations in learning environments can be observed in desirable depths. Importantly, the sample size is not large enough for many possibly interesting analyses. Given the focus on longitudinal analyses, the level of detail with regards to the learning environment has to be somewhat restricted. Clearly, NEPS cannot and will not attempt to replace other studies that yield information on, for instance, the quality of the educational system or the competence levels of teachers or that document changes in the school system. However, there are a small number of extensions to the longitudinal data base of NEPS that considerably strengthen the longitudinal analyses, including pilot studies and method studies.

At the upper secondary level, the NEPS design includes two additional data collections addressing two major changes in the Gymnasium system so that it can gauge the consequences of these reforms for individual educational biographies. These reforms can be viewed as “natural experiments” that provide a fascinating opportunity to assess the effect of institutionalized learning environments on educational outcomes (Morgan and Winship 2007). These two additional studies focus on an organizational reform (in Thuringia), and a G8 reform (in Baden-Wuerttemberg).

Reform of the curriculum and organization of upper secondary schooling

A major reform of the Gymnasium concerns the curriculum and organization of upper secondary schooling: Baden-Wuerttemberg, Brandenburg, Hesse, Saxony-Anhalt, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Hamburg, Saarland, Saxony, Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria, and Thuringia have already implemented major reforms or will be doing so soon. Although the exact nature of these reforms differs from state to state (see Trautwein and Neumann 2008; Trautwein et al. 2010a), much more emphasis is being placed on a common knowledge basis for all students in all states, with a lower level of differentiation and student choice in the last two years of school and less choice in the final examination (Abitur). For instance, students in most states will no longer have to decide whether to study math and German at an advanced (Leistungskurs) or a basic level (Grundkurs). This development is subject to criticism (Huber 2008) and stands in marked contrast to reforms in other countries, such as Sweden and the Netherlands (Mitter 2003) in which the degree of individualization has been increased.

Very little is known about the consequences of the effects of organizational and curricular reforms in the various states. Trautwein et al. (2010b) have performed a comparably systematic analysis of the organizational and curricular reform in Baden-Wuerttemberg. At the traditional Gymnasium, the reform yielded an improvement of one sixth of a standard deviation for preuniversity mathematics achievement, whereas average English achievement remained unchanged.

The organizational reform in Thuringia, the subject of an additional NEPS study, mainly aims toward a broader education instead of a high degree of specialization without making any alterations to the official curriculum. The reform for the traditional Gymnasium was implemented in 2009 (so the first cohort will be leaving school in 2011).

The main research questions in the context of the study in Thuringia are: Does the abolition of the advanced and basic courses lead to changes in the average level of student achievement accompanied by a lower variability? Which effects of the reform are expected from the viewpoint of students, parents, and teachers? Furthermore, how do students and their parents judge the requirements concerning achievement, teaching, and homework time both before and after the implementation of the reform? Are there reform effects on students’ motivation and academic self-concept in different subjects, or on their well-being? Does the reform increase students’ aspirations for higher education—particularly in the domain of science?

Sample. The first assessment in Thuringia (last cohort before the reform) took place in January 2010; the second (first cohort after the reform) will be conducted in January 2011 (see Chap. 4, this volume). At the first assessment (participation rate: 74%) more than 1300 students participated.

Student competence tests. These assess domain-general cognitive functions and domain-specific cognitive competencies (mathematics, English, biology, and physics achievement).

Student questionnaire. Central aspects covered by the student questionnaire are the expected reform effects, Wissenschaftspropädeutik, perceived (academic and time) demands of school, learning environment, parental aspirations, self-concept, motivation, interest (academic and vocational), personality, leisure activities, health complaints, occupational aspirations, intention to study, social background, and migration status.

Parent questionnaire. This questionnaire focuses on parents’ expected reform effects, parents’ educational and vocational aspirations for their child, perceived (academic and time) demands of school for their child, and social and migration status.

Teacher questionnaire. The main focus of the teacher questionnaire is on teachers’ satisfaction with the course, stress in teaching the course, perceived teaching effectiveness, expected reform effects, and appropriateness of the level of students’ choice (organizational aspects of the gymnasiale Oberstufe).

From 9 to 8 years: the introduction of the G8 Gymnasium

In recent years, most German states have switched from a 9-year (G9) to an 8-year (G8) Gymnasium system, meaning that Gymnasium students who do not repeat any years will finish school after 12 rather than 13 years. This change is being implemented sequentially in the different states (first G8 cohortsFootnote 3: 2007 in Saxony-Anhalt, 2008 in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania; 2009 in Saarland; 2010 in Hamburg; 2011 in Bavaria and Lower Saxony; 2012 in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Berlin, Brandenburg, and Bremen; 2013 in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hesse; 2016 in Schleswig-Holstein). Recent investigations on the effects of G8 reforms have shown decreasing mathematical achievement in Saxony-Anhalt (Büttner and Thomsen 2010), and less leisure time—stated to be not sufficient for recreation—in Bavaria (Milde-Busch et al. 2010).

An additional NEPS study is focusing on the G8 reform effects in Baden-Wuerttemberg. The following research questions are of major interest: Is the shortening of schooling by one year accompanied by decreased scholastic achievement and domain-general cognitive functions (Ceci 1996)? Are there negative reform effects on students’ well-being and leisure-time activities (e.g., due to having to spend more time doing homework)? Is there an increased need for private tutoring in the G8 Gymnasium system?

In Baden-Wuerttemberg, 50 schools will be sampled in 2011 and asked to participate in the study for three years (see Chap. 4, this volume). This design with three measurement points—including assessments one year before and one year after the double Abitur cohorts—will allow us to disentangle the Gymnasium reform effects from third-variable explanations such as long-term changes in the Gymnasium population or “teething troubles” with the implementation of the reform. Student competence tests, modified versions of the student and teacher questionnaires from the Thuringia reform study, and a principal questionnaire are planned.

Conclusion

Because of the longitudinal design, the nationwide sample, and the inclusion of standardized achievement tests, the NEPS will provide an excellent database for answering many questions of major scientific and political interest. With regard to the upper secondary schooling in the academic track, such questions address, for instance, the comparison of traditional and nontraditional pathways to the Abitur, academic achievement levels of Abitur students, social disparities, and the predictive power of indicators of achievement (school grades, competencies, Abitur certificate) on students’ further development. Furthermore, the additional NEPS studies on two German Abitur reforms will deliver valuable information on (not) intended effects of such implementations.