Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs,
Science and Technology
Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education
Issue 2 - Evidence - October 31 Sitting
OTTAWA, Thursday, October 31, 1996
The Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, met this day at 9:00 a.m. to continue its inquiry into the state of Post-Secondary education in Canada.
Senator M. Lorne Bonnell (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Honourable senators, we have with us this morning Mr. Doug Lynd, Assistant Director, Centre for EDUCATIONal Statistics, and John Jackson, the Chief, Post-Secondary education Section.
Please proceed.
Mr. Doug Lynd, Assistant Director, Centre for EDUCATION Statistics: Mr. Chairman, I apologize for not bringing any documentation, but we were informed just last Friday of this opportunity. We will, of course, give you a chance to ask questions later on. We would be happy to prepare documentation for the committee, according to your interests.
We are prepared this morning to make a brief presentation on our program and, more specifically, on aspects of our program that may be of direct interest to the committee.
I will give a very brief background on our program to start, and Mr. Jackson will provide some statistics related to your area of inquiry.
My first thought on hearing of your committee was, in fact, how is Post-Secondary education defined. This has been one of our problems over the many years that I have been associated with our program. Obviously, with the ten or twelve different EDUCATIONal systems in Canada and the different organizational structures they have, it is sometimes difficult to ensure that similar programs are grouped within the umbrella of Post-Secondary education. We have used, in many cases, the international standard classification of EDUCATION as developed by UNESCO, and followed it as far as we can to define Post-Secondary education in Canada.
That particular classification structure is currently being revised, and it may, in fact, change the actual programs we include in Post-Secondary educational analysis in the future, at least as it relates to international bodies and for international comparative statistics.
A brief background on our program at Statistics Canada: The mandate comes from the Statistics Act and states basically that we are to collect, analyse, abstract and publish statistical information on EDUCATION in Canada. The EDUCATION Division of Statistics Canada has been doing that since the creation of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics in 1919.
The program is designed to cover all levels of EDUCATION, and all providers of EDUCATION, but I will concentrate on that portion directed at post-secondary EDUCATION, as that is your area of inquiry.
The Chairman: You might give us your definition of Post-Secondary education at Statistics Canada first, so we know what we are talking about.
Mr. Lynd: Basically, Post-Secondary education at Statistics Canada is currently described as after secondary school, so that all trade vocational EDUCATION that is offered in the college structures is considered post-secondary EDUCATION. The difficulty that arises in Canada, in some cases, is that trade vocational EDUCATION is offered in Quebec in the Commissions Scolaires through their adult EDUCATION program, but for the purposes of comparative statistics, we classify the trade programs offered by the Commissions Scolaires as post-secondary.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: For the adults, not for youth.
Mr. Lynd: For the youth as well.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do you call what they get in high school post-secondary EDUCATION?
Mr. Lynd: They are getting a similar program. It is adult EDUCATION in Quebec.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I know the system well. In Quebec, you have primary grades and secondary school. In secondary school, starting in the third or fourth year, you can branch off to vocational, but to me it is part of secondary school. Some carry on in the general or the regular channel, and others --
[Translation]
Others branch off into vocational EDUCATION, but they are still considered secondary, as opposed to post-secondary students. Now then, if you are talking about adults, it is an entirely different matter. I have no problem with adults who take evening classes arranged by the school boards being considered post-secondary students, but when it comes to considering youth as post-secondary students, then I am somewhat surprised.
Therefore, I am not certain that your statistics are accurate, at least insofar as Quebec is concerned. Are there secondary students in other provinces who receive technical or vocational training?
[English]
Mr. Lynd: There are vocational programs in high school in other provinces, but they are often combined with the academic programs. The same thing occurs in Quebec, where you will have some vocational emphasis on a high school program, but the Commissions Scolaires separates its programs and calls one whole division the adult division. The adult division offers trade vocational EDUCATION. Some of the youth can go into that adult program.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Let us carry on. I have been involved with the largest school board in Canada for many years, so I know what high school is all about.
Mr. Lynd: You will be talking with people from the Quebec ministry, I am sure, and they will show you that the programs they include in their adult EDUCATION program are offered by the Commissions Scolaires.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Yes, I know that.
Mr. Lynd: In that particular program, whether the students taking the trade vocational programs are adult -- defined as eighteen or over -- or younger, they are included in our post-secondary statistics because they are comparable to similar programs that are offered in the colleges in the rest of the country.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: We have something different at the CÉGEP level, which perhaps could be compared to the community colleges in the rest of Canada. It is a different thing from the high school program for professional training or vocational training. Not everything is covered under CÉGEP, so I am not sure that your statistics would be perfect if they are based on that premise.
Mr. Lynd: We like to think they are. You are right, there are some definitional boundaries that make it difficult to decide where these programs go. To get comparability in the definition of Post-Secondary education, we sometimes have to adjust provincial systems and the data which come from them because they are offered at different levels or by different providers.
In the case of Quebec, the programs we are talking about are offered by the Commissions Scolaires. In other provinces, they are offered by the college structure, where they will have trade vocational sections or divisions. To put like statistics together then, we are putting together information on enrolments, staff and finance for programs that are offered at different levels.
When you talk about Post-Secondary education, I wondered whether the committee in fact was looking at trade vocational programs that may or may not be offered by commissioned school boards in the country.
The Chairman: We hope to. So far, we are finding out what the federal government does in EDUCATION from Stats Canada. We are leaving that to you.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: They are your statistics.
Mr. Lynd: For the purposes of explanation only, I will divide our post-secondary statistics program into two sections: The first is comprised of annual surveys designed to obtain information from administrative data of schools, and the second is comprised of sample surveys to obtain information from individuals. Those are the two different sources of information we have on EDUCATION in Canada.
This breakdown corresponds almost exactly with the funding for these programs, as the administrative surveys are funded through Statistics Canada's core budget, and the sample surveys are funded primarily through cost recovery or contracts with our clients. One of the major clients in this area is Human Resources Development Canada.
Our administrative surveys are conducted annually, and collect stock and flow data on students, academic staff, revenues and expenditures of post-secondary EDUCATION institutions.
Our special surveys are conducted periodically, dependent on information needs and ability of clients to fund the projects. Some of the special studies would be sample surveys directed at recent graduates and at current students to find out information that would not normally be contained on the administrative records of the schools they are attending. There are additional surveys being planned now to look at transitions of youth and the kinds of patterns they have of attending school, entering the labour force, going back to school, et cetera. For that kind of information, we generally have to approach individuals, and that would call for a sample survey rather than access to the administrative data of the schools.
Just to give you some idea of the size of our program within Statistics Canada, our budget is $5.1 million, and $1.7 million goes towards post-secondary EDUCATION statistics.
I will conclude these opening remarks by commenting briefly on a very recent development. Until two days ago, the unit within Statistics Canada charged with the task of describing EDUCATION in Canada was the EDUCATION Subdivision. The unit was officially renamed, on Tuesday of this week, the Centre for EDUCATION Statistics. What is the difference? The Centre for EDUCATION Statistics will submit annually its strategic plan for providing information on EDUCATION to the Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council for their guidance and direction.
The Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council is comprised of the Chief Statistician and the provincial deputy ministers responsible for EDUCATION. As such, from this point on the work of our centre will be a collaborative undertaking between the provinces and territories, the Council of Ministers of EDUCATION Canada, and Statistics Canada,.
With that very brief introduction to the overall program, I would turn the floor over to Mr. Jackson to describe briefly some of the statistics we put together which we think might be of interest to your inquiry.
Mr. John Jackson, Chief, Post-Secondary education Section, Statistics Canada: From a conversation I had with Grant Purves of the Library of Parliament, who is supporting the committee from a research perspective, my understanding is that the committee is interested in the question of the growing indebtedness of students and the possible impact that has on access to higher EDUCATION. I have addressed that question in particular to the extent that we can. I hope it hits the mark.
I would like to briefly address the subject of university financing, particularly the balance between what government pays and what students pay, to talk about the enrolment situation in universities and colleges in the past fifteen years or so, since 1980, and then to talk about some of the factors which influence enrolment over and above the cost of tuition: the state of the economy, demography, the size of the group passing through, the main school age group, and finally the question of participation rates, that portion of the school age population that is, in fact, in school.
In terms of defining Post-Secondary education, I have looked principally at universities, and to some extent, colleges. When I say "colleges", I mean the two and three year career programs. This is at the exclusion of the more difficult to define as in-or-out vocational and adult EDUCATION programs.
On post-secondary financing, the vast majority of university funding comes from government and the remainder from student fees and other sources such as donations and investments.
In 1980, government grants provided 84 per cent of operating revenues of universities, while student fees provided a further 13 per cent. By 1989, the relative shares of government and students had changed to 80 per cent for government and 17 per cent for students. That is quite a significant increase. Although government grants to Post-Secondary education had increased over that period, by about 15 per cent, in real terms, tuition had increased 89 per cent, so there is a rebalancing going on here.
That trend was accelerated in the 1990s, and by 1995, government grants had rposted to 72 per cent and student fees had increased to 24 per cent of total revenues. That reflects a further 47 per cent increase in tuition fees since 1989 and, of course, we have seen recently in the newspapers, and with the release of the CPI data a week or so ago, that the tuition increases among the provinces this year have been in the range of 0 to 20 per cent in Ontario. It is an average of 11.8 per cent this year alone across the country.
From another perspective, in 1980, the ratio of government grants per dollar of student fees collected was $6.44. By 1995, the ratio had rposted to $2.97, another significant change in terms of this rebalancing.
With respect to colleges, during roughly the same time-frame, this change was much less dramatic. We do not have reliable figures before 1984. In 1984, governments contributed 89 per cent of operating revenues and student fees contributed 9 per cent. By 1993, grants had rposted to 82 per cent, with student fees representing 12 per cent. College level tuition fees are also significantly lower than university fees, so that even though there has been an increase, it is an increase on a much smaller base.
The relationship of tuition to enrolment is quite a stark contrast. With respect to universities, between 1980 and 1989 the number of full-time university students increased 35 per cent. This occurred despite a fairly significant decrease in the number of students of university age. That is the age cohort 18 to 21 and, to some extent, up to 24. That was a very considerable increase of 35 per cent. Part-time enrolment during the same time period increased by 24 per cent.
In the early 1990s, it appeared, at first, that students would continue to enrol in record numbers. However, in 1992, for the first time in seven years, the rate of growth began to slow. This slowing of the rate continued through 1993 and 1994. Total enrolment did continue to increase but the rate of increase had slowed down. By 1995, full-time student enrolment had actually declined by just under 1 per cent. That is the first decline since 1978.
Meanwhile, there were dramatic decreases as well in part-time enrolment. After two decades of almost constant growth in part-time university enrolment, significant declines occurred in 1993, 1994 and 1995. These declines were so significant in fact that the total number of part-time university students enrolled in 1995 is now back to 1982 levels. There has been a significant decrease and a significant drop-off.
At the college level, between 1981 and 1989, full-time enrolment in two- and three-year programs increased by 19 per cent, so it was a smaller growth than in universities. Unlike university, however, full-time college enrolment has shown a further steady increase on into the 1990s, from 1989 to 1995, a further 29 per cent, although we have noticed from 1993, 1994, 1995, that again this rate of increase has slowed, started to level off. Although part-time enrolment continued to increase right up until 1994, we have started to notice in the preliminary data for 1995 that there has been a significant decrease. This is an interesting picture, and I say that from my own perspective, just having looked at it recently.
Despite the significant increase in tuition costs beginning in 1981 -- which, incidentally, was a low point for the cost of tuition relative to family income and student ability to earn -- we have also seen significant increases in enrolment. There does not seem to be a direct relationship, except that we are beginning to see some levelling off.
This levelling off could be due to a number of factors, not just tuition alone. The ones that I would like to talk about are the state of the economy, demography, and the participation rates, which really are important factors in studying enrolment trends overall.
With regard to the economy, enrolment increases were evident in the 1982-1983 recession and in the 1990-1992 period. It would appear that, for lack of job prospects, student enrolment increases because young people are opting for continued EDUCATION. Conversely, as the economy improves, you find that enrolment starts to taper off again, as they are opting for employment opportunities. This could explain, in part, this recent slowing and decline in university enrolment rather than a direct relationship with tuition costs.
The demographics, are a little harder to factor out because they are obscured a bit by participation rates, which I will speak about in a moment. As I said earlier, there was quite a significant decline in the age cohort through the 1980s, so that you would expect enrolment to be coming down, rather than going up. Through the 1990s there has been a levelling of the age cohort, where you would expect, all things being equal, enrolment to be level, but again enrolment has gone up and then tapered a little bit. As I say, it is a bit difficult to see the impact of demography behind this, although it will be a factor.
The participation rate is defined as that proportion of any given age group which is attending college or university. The main age group is the 18-to-21 year old group. In 1980, the participation rate was hovering at around ten per cent. By 1994, it had increased to 17 per cent, so we have had a significant increase in the participation rate of the key university attending age group, and that is a very positive picture for Canada. At the present time, we are in second place behind the United States in terms of participation rates, higher than all other OECD countries.
There are some other questions which may be interesting from your point of view which I would like to address. If tuition fees are getting higher, if accessibility is being affected, are students taking longer to complete their studies because they need to stop and work, they need to work longer to save to go to school?
The average age of university students has increased since 1980, but only marginally. For example, in 1980, slightly more than 60 per cent of undergraduate students were under 22. Now, only slightly less than 60 per cent are under 22. It has been a very small change in that respect. It appears to be because students are taking longer to complete their degrees, and I am speaking here of students who are enrolled full-time. There is a sense that the competition for advanced EDUCATION is operating in such a way that students are repeating courses to get higher marks, or maybe taking extra courses to improve their ability to get into Master's programs or specialized professional programs.
In 1980, full-time students were taking 3.9 years to complete a BA In 1992, it had risen to 4.2 years. Again, this is not a significant change, and apparently is explained more by the interest in improving marks. The same trends are evident as well at the postgraduate level, the Master's and Ph.D. levels.
Another question is: Are more students having to borrow money, and are they having to borrow more, to attend Post-Secondary education? I have taken a look at the National Graduate Survey which surveyed 1982, 1986, and 1990 graduates two years after they graduated. The percentage of students taking loans did increase between 1982 and 1990 but, again, only marginally. However, there was a substantial increase among college students between 1982 and 1986, where the percentage requiring loans went from 35 per cent to 42 per cent. That remained steady up to 1990, so the requirement for loans did not continue to increase. Overall, approximately 40 per cent of students are currently relying on loans to finance their EDUCATION.
For college students, the average loan amounts in 1982, upon graduation, was approximately $3,500. By 1990, it had increased to $5,700. That is in 1990 constant dollars, so that increase is close to two times in real terms.
For Bachelor students, the average loan amounts went from $5,300 in 1982 to $8,700 in 1990. It is at about the same level for Master's and Ph.D. programs, notwithstanding that they are in school longer. The fact that they have an ability to earn through research, teaching assignments and such probably means that their loan requirements have levelled off.
There is a substantial increase, not because more kids are having to borrow but because they are borrowing more. Now, if they are borrowing more, are they having more difficulty repaying these loans?
For college students, the debt-to-earning ratios increased significantly between 1982 and 1990 from 13 per cent, that is the debt relative to their income, to 23 per cent. For Bachelor students, the ratio increased from 15 per cent to 30 per cent. Increases are less significant, again, at the higher levels. It may be that the labour market and income levels are contributing factors here because, in 1992, when the 1990 graduates were interviewed, we were in a recession. Therefore, those who had jobs, and good paying jobs, may have been fewer and, as a result, it brought down the figures. The economy was much better when the 1982 graduates were interviewed in 1984.
Despite the change, at all levels, 1990 graduates had paid back only slightly smaller proportions of their debts than the 1986 graduates, so their record of repayment remained quite good. This difference is again probably due to the poor economy with regard to the 1992 interviews.
Unfortunately, we do not have 1982 data on this question. In both the years 1986 and 1992, the majority of students had paid back more than half of their loans in the first two years. The pay-back rates were much higher for Master's and Ph.D. graduates. Overall, 15 to 20 per cent of the students interviewed said that they had problems repaying. Over 80 per cent said that they had not had problems repaying. Rather than citing unreasonable debt loads as the reason for having problems repaying, the vast majority of those with repayment difficulties, over 80 per cent, cited unemployment and insufficient earnings, in effect, under-employment, as the reason why they seemed to be having some difficulty repaying their loans.
Again, despite the significant increases in tuition, we have not seen evidence of crippling effects, either from the point of view of enrolment or ability to pay back. What is interesting is that there seems to have been a capacity to accommodate these increases so far. Again, we do not have data that covers this most recent period. Tuition fees are still going up. The ramifications of that trend as reflected in student enrolment are becoming more and more evident, and it could be that the plateau or the breaking point is being reached.
The other possibility is that, despite increases in tuition, tuition still represents a relatively small portion of overall costs, the significant costs being food and lodging and transportation. It could be that more students are living at home than at other times. It could be that more of them are working more hours of part-time. We do not know this, but these are the kinds of things we hope to be focusing on in the future and perhaps shedding some light on.
In the absence of tuition increases, we do not know what enrolments might have been. It is difficult to say because it is a matter of personal choice. It would appear, despite these increases, that students are still putting a high value on university EDUCATION for the interesting jobs that it brings and the better socio-economic standing.
This might be an appropriate point to stop and answer questions.
The Chairman: You are talking about student loans. Are you only speaking of the government loans or bank loans? What loans?
Mr. Jackson: The question was with respect to all borrowing. That included the Canada Student Loan Program, plus other borrowing.
The Chairman: Bank loans and other types of loans.
Mr. Jackson: What it probably does not include is parents' borrowing.
The Chairman: Does Statistics Canada track the default rate of student loans, how much they are defaulting, what percentage default?
Mr. Jackson: We do not. The student loan program at HRD is tracking it. They do that.
The Chairman: You do not keep those statistics?
Mr. Jackson: Perhaps we should do that. I do not know whether the default rate has changed at all.
The Chairman: What was it last that you heard?
Mr. Jackson: I do not know.
The Chairman: How will you know if it changed or not, if you do not know?
Mr. Jackson: Well, I do not know if it changed.
The Chairman: Has Statistics Canada done a national graduate survey since 1994?
Mr. Jackson: The graduate survey for 1995 graduates will take place in 1997.
The Chairman: What about the 1994 graduates?
Mr. Jackson: It is only done every four or five years.
The Chairman: So you do not have the statistics for 1994?
Mr. Lynd: No. Initially, it was a four-year rotation: 1982 graduates, 1986 graduates, and 1990 graduates, and the next cohort should have been 1994. The survey underwent a review in that period of time and it had to be extended. They took the 1995 graduates instead because they had not completed the review on changing questions or reviewing the whole procedure. As a consequence, there was a one-year delay in implementing the survey. It will be the 1995 graduates in 1997.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Thank you for your interesting presentation. I will re-read it carefully because many figures were cited.
If we are interested in funding or financing students' studies, I would like to know if you are able to or if you have established a comparison between Quebec and the other provinces. I take Quebec because it is Quebec that I know best, and I think Quebec is probably more different than the other provinces, but I might be wrong there.
For instance, community colleges and CÉGEP in Quebec are not quite the same but they are at the same level in a sense. CÉGEP is entirely free. Do your surveys show whether that factor has an influence on the enrolment of students there in comparison to other provinces and on enrolment for further studies? If one completes community college with a debt, -- I think you mentioned $5,000 -- does it have an influence in pursuing further studies at university? Is it a discouraging factor in pursuing university studies?
Mr. Jackson: We have not looked at it that finely. Clearly, if you are just facing university and you have already accumulated some debt, I think that would be a factor.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I will look into it a little bit more when we meet the students association.
In terms of this dissuasion of even going to community college or CÉGEP, does the fact that in Quebec there is no fee for the same level of studies create any difference in enrolment? I am not talking about anything else now.
In Quebec, you can go to CÉGEP. They start to charge a little bit when students repeat after two or three years. If they come back again for the same session, there is a small fee, but there really is no fee in comparison to the other provinces.
Mr. Jackson: Again, I think the consumers of the EDUCATION would be in a better position to say what influence paying no tuition fees would have on them, no tuition as opposed to college tuition.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do your statistics show any difference?
Mr. Jackson: No.
Mr. Lynd: We quoted the figures for increasing college enrolment for Canada, and they really have been fairly evenly distributed across the country, so there does not seem to be that effect that may be evident in Quebec, where there are no fees, versus fees in other provinces. Of course, the college fees are quite a bit lower than university fees, too.
Your first question is, does the college debt affect their choice of going to university? Again, it is quite different in many of the other provinces because the college programs are considered more terminal, and therefore, although there may be more people now going from college to university or university to college, that was not a factor in the past.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: The reason I am questioning so intensely on this point is that I know that most of the student associations that come before us will ask for more money, grants, funding, and who knows what else. We know that university fees in Quebec are, unfortunately, in my view, quite a bit lower than in other provinces, so much so that students come from other provinces to enrol at McGill. Maybe they are coming for other reasons, but that is one reason, that it is going to cost them quite a bit less than if they enrol in their own province. Have you studied this a little bit more carefully?
Is it not of significant importance that the fees are higher in Toronto in comparison to Montreal? Does it affect the enrolment in one way or the other?
Mr. Lynd: We certainly have statistics for universities on interprovincial movement for the purpose of study. We have not noticed that the movement into Quebec is disproportionate to the movement into or out of other provinces. It may require more study. I should have the statistics right in front of me, and I do not, but certainly we have not noticed a disproportionate flow of students to Quebec. As a result, my intuition is that that is not a factor.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: To what extent is the increase in tuition a discouraging factor in pursuing studies? You know that they will come here and say that they charge too much, for example, in B.C., that fees should decrease. Have you noticed whether increased fees have much influence on enrolment?
In Quebec, they are talking about increasing the university fees right now, and the students, the syndicate and everyone else are saying that this cannot be done because you are closing out a university EDUCATION to so many more people. From what I have heard from you, that does not seem to be an important factor in considering increasing fees. Am I wrong?
Mr. Jackson: It does not seem to have been to the present. Now, whether continuing increases will become a bigger factor is a matter of speculation at this point. It is hard to say.
Mr. Lynd: We are basing that decision on the growth and enrolment that we have seen while fees have been increased. We do not know whether, if fees had not increased, enrolment would be twice as high now.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Quebec fees, at the university level, are generally one-third less than in the other provinces. Have you not examined whether that is beneficial to student enrolment?
Mr. Jackson: I understand, anecdotally, that when the fees in Quebec were even lower than they are now, people would say, "I can attend McGill, a high prestige university, and the combination of my living expenses and tuition will not be significantly more than if I stay in Ottawa."
However, Quebec has increased its fees significantly and that differential is now smaller, for example, between Quebec and Ontario, although that may be changing quickly. The last time I looked, the level for a BA program in Quebec was $1,700, and it slides up to about $3,200 in Nova Scotia.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: A lot more.
Mr. Jackson: On the other hand, Nova Scotia is relatively high. The average is $2,400.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do you see any difference in enrolment between boys and girls? I suppose we still can call them "boys" and "girls" at that age. They are not men and women yet.
The Chairman: "Male" and "female."
Senator Lavoie-Roux: No, I hate that term. Do not talk to me about "female".
Senator DeWare: "Young men" and "young women."
Mr. Jackson: When participation increased through the 1980s and into the 1990s from 10 per cent to 17 per cent, it was largely driven by the increased participation on the part of women, so much so that women are in the majority in the undergraduate programs at university.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: They are getting to be the majority in the graduate programs, too. Do they borrow as much or less than the boys?
Mr. Jackson: Well, that is interesting. At the graduate level, in some disciplines, the girls end up borrowing a bit more. Generally speaking, it is comparable at the undergraduate level. Despite the fact that they tend to have slightly lower incomes after graduation, after two years they have paid more back than the boys. I do not know what that says.
Senator DeWare: More conscientious.
Senator Andreychuk: It says a lot.
Mr. Lynd, you indicated that the new Centre for EDUCATION Statistics will report to the Chief Statistician and to the provincial deputy ministers of EDUCATION. Is your information disseminated to the decision-makers at the federal level who form our policies on employment strategies, on trade strategies, on health strategies? Do they avail themselves of this information?
Mr. Lynd: Certainly, we have always had a very close working relationship with other federal government departments. I mentioned Human Resource Development in my opening remarks, but it also applies to External Affairs, the Canadian International Development Agency and, really, all federal departments that are stakeholders in the field of EDUCATION.
We provide these departments with set annual tabulations or reports that they have requested or contracted for over the years. The move to the EDUCATION Centre was an attempt to bring within our purview a little more closely the provincial ministries responsible for EDUCATION. In the past, we have had no formal involvement with the provincial ministries, yet they administer the bulk of EDUCATION in Canada. We felt that we should be addressing their concerns and issues and priorities more closely.
Three years ago we created the Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council, which comprises the Chief Statistician and all the deputy ministers of EDUCATION. We have worked on some joint projects, but at no point was the mandate of that particular group to look at the program of the EDUCATION Subdivision of Statistics Canada.
With the creation of the Centre for EDUCATION Statistics, we will now present annually to that body our operational plan or strategic plan for addressing EDUCATIONal issues in Canada, and it will have a chance to provide advice or guidance as to whether we are following the right path to address their concerns on issues in EDUCATION. In point of fact, it will give the deputy ministers in all of the jurisdictions a formal opportunity to advise on our program. In that way, we hope to bring the provinces in, as well as keep on with the work we have always been doing with the federal departments and non-governmental organizations.
Senator Andreychuk: Mr. Chairman, from the federal perspective, while there are informal links for sharing information, it is important that there be a certain formality at the federal level to impress upon politicians that there is some necessity to what they are doing. When they come to develop programs or approve programs, they must know what students are doing. They must know what is happening with young people. No wonder there are sometimes gaps in the job training and trade programs that we establish, particularly when it comes to skills needed and skills available. Perhaps we can pick up on that issue, not necessarily today.
Mr. Jackson, you pointed out that we were second only to the U.S. in OECD statistics. Did you say that per capita we are producing the second largest number of graduate students?
Mr. Jackson: In the population between 18 and 21, we have the second highest participation rate.
Senator Andreychuk: It has been said that countries that have zeroed in on basic training for skills, professions, technical expertise, particularly in sciences, have the competitive edge in the international market. They point to Japan as one example. Do you have any statistics to back that up?
We have focused for a number of years on Post-Secondary education from the point of view of getting people more postated. Only recently have we focused on technical training is as part of Post-Secondary education.
Mr. Jackson: Mr. Lynd has been more involved in the international area.
Senator Andreychuk: Are we putting the right emphasis on post-secondary EDUCATION to be able to compete in this new global market, or are we still rather broad and general, leaving it to individuals to determine how they will make their way in that global market?
Mr. Lynd: That is a good question. I do not think we can answer it this morning. There certainly are data available within OECD -- they are not data that I work with -- on the structures of the various labour forces. I cannot point you to a reference right now either, but I can try to find one. I think they have looked at the make-up of the labour force in terms of occupational industries in which the population is working. One can draw some inferences from the production of the various economies by looking at the make-up of their labour force. I cannot speak from personal experience on the point, but I can try to get you a reference on the OECD.
Mr. Jackson: One trend occurring within universities and colleges is that the general arts program enrolments are less favoured. Computing, engineering, biology, seem to be increasing in relative proportions. Within this structure of EDUCATION that we have, shifts are occurring in a less planned way than would be the case from a government direction, for example, the move towards technology. As I say, it is happening at both levels, college and university.
Senator Andreychuk: You have said that students are taking longer to go through the system. Do you have any statistics on completion rates? Do those who enter university complete university?
I do not know what "take longer" means here. "Take longer" can mean to complete, or just simply that students are in the system longer. That is important because we know that some students have said, "I cannot get a job so I might as well spend a year in university and we will see what that brings me. If there is a job, I opt out." Has university been an employment creation opportunity for them?
Also, are there any statistics comparing us to other countries? Students in the Asian economies nowadays seem to be able to complete quickly, and the drop-out rate is less, whereas our students are taking longer. What does that mean?
Mr. Jackson: Canada does have, relative to population, the highest rate of BA graduates of all OECD countries.
One of the difficulties that we have with your other questions -- and it is a good reason for closer co-operation with the provinces -- is we do not have a good ability to track students. Within one institution and even between fields of study, we are fine. However, once they start changing institutions, which happens frequently, or jurisdictions, even more so, crossing provincial boundaries, we lose track of them. We cannot pick them up.
Our hope is, with improvements to the university survey, we will be able to develop some kind of tracking system so that we can better understand how these school careers go, what kinds of turns they take, and for what reasons. It could very well be that people are sensing changes in the economy and the demand for various skills and they are moving out of university and into colleges, but we are not sure. They could be moving from one university to another university in a different field of study. It is an interesting question.
Mr. Lynd: I will add one point: The Asia example is an interesting one, and one which we have looked at within the OECD structure. There is no doubt Asian students complete programs much more quickly, without loss in time, but at entrance, there is a very tight selection process. Of their total population, probably only the top five per cent, or even less, are accepted and enter the institutions of higher EDUCATION.
In Canada, the United States and Europe, a greater percentage of the population is taken in, therefore, one might expect more of a lag time or more subject failure as students proceed towards their degrees.
Senator Andreychuk: That is one area on which we need to get statistics, to know how prepared the next generation is to adapt to whatever situations it might face. There is a totally different competitive market today, less of a government-involved market. It is more of a global market. If we are offering training, it should not only be for Canadian jobs. We should be training people to work in Canada but perhaps with a trade-off aspect. Increasingly, we are relying on our exports as opposed to internal consumption. It seems there is no statistical research being done as yet on that area.
Mr. Lynd: You are quite right. Although, on the preparation side, we are involved with a number of activities, directly or indirectly, which measure this preparedness. That is the aim of the recently introduced longitudinal survey of children and youth, to follow cohorts of individuals annually, interviewing their teachers, principals, and parents over a long time period. Within that program, individual students will be tested to determine the value-added factor, if you will, between various points.
The provinces are going ahead with their standard achievers indicators project and testing students. I believe students in grades 6, 9 and 11 are being tested. I will have to get that information.
There is much more work going on today than there was five years ago and before that, to get some sense of how prepared children are as they reach the end of secondary school and are poised to enter our post-secondary institutions. We are still a small distance away from having enough information from those surveys to answer your question.
Senator Andreychuk: I would like to address two other areas: One, you said that tuition rates have some correlation with grants given to universities, in other words, the less money given to the university, the higher tuition rates have risen in the last five to ten years.
Originally, when grants were rposted, most provincial governments made statements indicating that there was slack in the system, that the rposttions would not necessarily take away from the universities, particularly their right to determine their own programming.
Have you taken that factor into account in your statistics at all? I think that point was arguable before, but now the universities are in a position where they have to cut back, they are thinner.
Mr. Jackson: From what I have seen, and this is just a more general reading rather than statistical, through the 1980s, although the amount of grants was increasing, it was not keeping pace with the increased cost, and universities did rationalize considerably. There were cutbacks in terms of percentage expenditures on physical plant, maintenance, classroom teaching, pretty much every area. In fact, by the end of the 1980s, there was speculation that huge amounts of infrastructure costs were being set aside, the universities just could not afford them, and that this would come back to haunt them eventually.
It has become more critical in the 1990s, although again I do not have the figures. There is a point at which you can contract to take up the slack and a point at which that ends and you start eating the flesh.
During that period, too, because budgets were not going up nearly as quickly as enrolment, there was an impression of greater efficiency. You are serving more students; the cost per student is falling. That is great for business when enrolment is going up. With enrolment starting to fall in the 1990s, and with universities being much more dependent than ever on student revenues, the universities could well be in big trouble. I should say that I am not speaking as Stats Canada. These are just things I have read. It appears that there may be a crunch down the road, especially if enrolments taper off.
The other factor is age of faculty. Without renewal, the levelling off of students numbers per classroom and all the rest of it, the average age of faculty has moved higher, and as that happens, they tend to get into higher wage categories as well. The average cost, therefore, per faculty member has gone up.
Senator Andreychuk: Coupled with that fact, professors have certain disciplines, and therefore universities cannot switch them from one discipline to another.
Mr. Jackson: It does represent a considerable dilemma for the university presidents.
Senator Andreychuk: Do you have statistics on grants received by universities in the form of research grants, et cetera? Universities and post-secondary EDUCATION are not just about students and training them; it is about the whole area of research and development, which is as much a part of EDUCATION. Do you track statistics on how many grants are given to institutions, how many research grants come from private sources? The new wave is, of course, the partnering of professors and faculties with business. Do you do any of that statistic gathering, to give us an idea of those trends in research and development within Post-Secondary education?
Mr. Lynd: Yes, we do. We are not able to tell you the number of contracts or whether the number of contracts is growing or rposting. Within the financial reports of the universities and colleges, we do obtain revenue broken down by type, private research funds, endowments, et cetera. We can track it on the basis of total dollars, whether it is going up or down, but not whether that represents a number of contracts or anything.
Senator Andreychuk: Could that information be filed with the committee?
The Chairman: Perhaps we could ask them to send us a copy and we could have it for our reference.
Mr. Lynd: Sure.
Senator Andreychuk: Would you have, within that information, indication of shifts? Do you have it by disciplines or just by global institutions? Could you tell us whether the majority of research activity and development is in the hard sciences, the soft sciences or in computer science?
Mr. Lynd: In point of fact, estimates are done on that area, but I do not think they are based on actual contract information. They are based on the number of staff in various faculties, so it is prorated. Total dollars are estimated to be distributed the same as the professional staff. I think that is how the research and science statistics are estimated.
Senator Andreychuk: I am interested in seeing some of the comparisons. Is the information based on 10-year or 20-year periods? It would be interesting to know whether the research and development component of the universities is increasing or decreasing. Is it private funding? Is it public funding?
Mr. Lynd: If I can take that question away, I would be happy to get back to you.
Senator DeWare: You said that the demographics really do not play a role here. They must have played a role between 1970 and 1980. Your statistics sort of start in 1982. If the baby boom group went through post-secondary training in the 1970s and 1980s, one would expect to see a drop-off in enrolment in the last ten years.
Mr. Jackson: We do have statistics back through the 1960s and 1970s too, with respect to enrolment. Of course, when the baby boom hit the university level enrolment increased substantially.
Senator DeWare: It scared them all half to death.
Mr. Jackson: I think in 1978 was the first and only decline in enrolment. You can see where the bulk of the baby boom would have been passing through by that time.
Senator DeWare: That would cause an increase in expenditures, an increase in everything. Once that group went through, expenditures would start to rposte along with the numbers, would they not?
Mr. Jackson: Then the participation rate takes over. The number of people attending university continued to be greater, using the available facilities.
Senator DeWare: Senator Andreychuk was asking you about the future trade and the global economy. Mr. Jackson, when you first started, I think you mentioned something about subject or courses changing to meet the availability of employment in the country. Are our institutions changing their courses to meet the demand or are the students changing their demand for courses to meet the need out there? The students seem to see the need before we do because they are the ones out looking for employment. You were discussing the point on a more international level, but what about just here in Canada?
Mr. Lynd: It is difficult to say exactly why institutions or systems change their programs. Is it because of the demand of the students or because of the interaction with the industry? Certainly, I think you will find that the institutions themselves, particularly the colleges, will tell you that it is because of interaction and planning with industry.
We find, in looking at graduates entering the labour force in various disciplines and where they go, that if there is a growth in unemployment among graduates in certain fields in the labour force, about two years later, enrolment will decline. That decline would tend to indicate that these students have quite an effect, just by talking to their peers or whomever, and indicating that people are having difficulty in this discipline or this field in getting jobs. I cannot answer the question about why they change but certainly I think student demand has a great effect.
Senator DeWare: Some of them are saying, "Why should I bother taking a BA? I am not going to be able to get a job afterwards." A BA broadens your horizons. It gives you the opportunity to go on to something else.
Speaking about trade, when I was involved in this area in New Brunswick, the need for tradesmen in two industries came up rather quickly. We found out that the average age of airplane mechanics was 55. There was nobody coming up through the system to take over when these gentlemen -- most of them were gentlemen at that time -- retired. Of course, what do the colleges do? They put on a course to train airplane mechanics. Then the same thing happens in the shoemaking industry. Demand evolves in the trades area, but for universities it is different.
Senator Andreychuk: That is the problem, because we were told we had too many engineers in the 1970s and now we are told we do not have enough. I remember politicians all over the place saying we do not need any more engineers, we need this and we need that.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: We still have too many.
Senator Andreychuk: No.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Most of them are unemployed.
Senator Andreychuk: I beg to differ on that point because of the need for them in many areas.
Do you track the number of foreign students in the system? Could you provide us with any information on that?
Mr. Jackson: Yes, we do. That is a very interesting area because, although we continue to have more foreign students in Canada in absolute terms, we are definitely losing market share. The United States, the U.K., Australia in particular, have increased their numbers significantly. Australia has developed a strategy around attracting and serving the Asia market.
Speaking of working with the federal government and structures, I understand there is an interdepartmental network starting now to think about Canadian EDUCATION as an export commodity.
Senator Andreychuk: Exactly.
Mr. Jackson: When you think about it, we have a wonderful country to live in, and the idea of coming here is attractive to foreign students. Canada's EDUCATIONal system has a wonderful reputation, and yet foreign students have not been coming in increasing numbers to take advantage of what we have to offer.
Senator Andreychuk: Aside from that, there is a strategic reason we would want them here, too.
Mr. Jackson: Exactly. The downstream impact of enrolling foreign students is beneficial in the long run as they return home, or in some cases remain in Canada, because of the ability to do commerce with their own country. I had always thought that we created a bit of a brain drain on the Third World, almost unfairly, because so many decide to stay. As it turns out, only 10 per cent decide to stay.
Quite a number of foreign students go back to their home country, then apply as landed immigrants and return to Canada. Apparently, because the group within the returning group will enter into commerce, often with their own country, they create an economic benefit for their own country far in excess to what they could do if they stayed home and, in addition, they improve the situation that we enjoy here.
Senator Andreychuk: This also reinforces trade practices with which we identify.
Mr. Jackson: Exactly. I am now trying to get aboard this group that I have heard of, hoping that we can bring some focus to it in terms of an export kind of model.
Senator Andreychuk: I heard yesterday at the Foreign Affairs committee meeting with the Asia-Pacific Foundation -- which, of course, reports to Parliament -- that they have been working on this area of foreign students and how it will improve our global competitiveness, both immediately and strategically. It is a source of income. It is a source of mutual benefit in trade investment in the future. I hope that Ross has spoken to you about getting the witnesses because I think the material that he was talking about is almost more pertinent to our study than it was to what we were doing in the other environment.
I grew up with universities saying that foreign students offered a good cross-cultural experience for our students to share and we embraced them. All of a sudden, we said that they are a drain on our university, it costs us too much to postate these people, and what's more, they breach all the rules and stay here and are not of benefit to their own country.
There has been a dramatic shift in thinking. Is there any empirical data to support this shift in thinking? Is there any tracking of foreign students?
The Chairman: Could we get statistics on foreign students, how many are coming each year for the past ten years?
Mr. Lynd: Sure.
The Chairman: Send it to our clerk.
Mr. Lynd: Although it would not be within the purview of your field of inquiry, it is also possible to look at the number of Canadian students studying abroad.
The Chairman: We would like to get those statistics as well.
Mr. Lynd: They come from OECD and UNESCO, but we can pull it out for you.
The Chairman: Can you tell me, as of the last ten years, what percentage of our students worked while going to university? What is the percentage of students who are working today compared to, say, ten years ago? They have to work part-time. What percentage of those students, compared to those that do not work, pass with high marks? Does part-time work affect their marks? Do you have those kinds of statistics?
Mr. Jackson: I am not sure about our statistics. I did read a study at some time in the past that indicated, up to a certain number of hours, there appeared to be no effect on marks but after -- and I can not remember the number of hours -- it was in the teens somewhere, there was a noticeable effect on marks.
The Chairman: Where did you get that information?
Mr. Jackson: I will have to search my mind and see if I can find it. It is a research study I read somewhere.
The Chairman: Have you got that research in your department?
Mr. Lynd: Yes, I think that was in our department.
Senator DeWare: I read that somewhere, too.
The Chairman: Will you dig it out and send us a copy as well?
Senator Andreychuk: One other thing, and perhaps it is not for these gentlemen testifying today, but a lot of the difficulty for students was eliminated with the extension of classes and the adaptability of university programs.
Traditionally, you went for a year long. I am old enough to remember when most Canadian universities went to a semester system, which allowed students to opt in and opt out. It meant it took longer, but students were able to work for a period of time.
Another thing to come along is co-op programs. For example, many students in computers, business and some of the social work fields are attending university classes for a time, then opting out for a practicum. Then they come back to university again. That may explain why our statistics are skewed to show longer periods. We should address that question to the university program, when they appear to see whether they have made those adjustments for those reasons, or is there a real delay and we do take longer? It certainly has a significant impact on delivery of services and their cost at the university level.
The Chairman: Do we have any statistics on the number of students who are sponsored by business; in other words, companies that are sending their workers to university. They take more courses, and when they graduate they are experts in their field. Their EDUCATION has been probably half-sponsored.
There is a great opportunity in Canada for more sponsorship by industry in universities and colleges. Do you have any statistics along that line?
Mr. Lynd: Again, I think we can find something which would provide you some information on that area. Our adult EDUCATION and training survey asked individuals for any EDUCATIONal activities in which they had participated in the previous 12 months, and if they had participated in any EDUCATIONal activity, was it sponsored, was it not, et cetera. We can draw from that, but I would have to go back and look at the classification structures again, to see if I can designate it by industry or groups.
The Chairman: Can you get us any information on where the jobs are available? I understand from listening to the Minister of International Trade that there are thousands of jobs available in the electronic highway abroad, but we do not have the people here in Canada who are trained to take those jobs, to go abroad and fit in there. Canada could become involved with those companies and perhaps create more trade with the country. There gets to be a Canadian connection. If we knew where the jobs were available, we could advise the universities to change their courses to fill the vacancies. Do you have those kinds of statistics?
Senator Andreychuk: This goes to my initial question, are they collecting the statistics that help us in global competitiveness? It is a very new field.
It is certainly not the responsibility of these gentlemen exclusively. The government should be saying, "These are the things we need." My question related to tying into the federal system directly. I think it is admirable that now we are tying in from the provincial side, but I think there is a federal responsibility, and there should be some way to track in the federal system that kind of responsibility.
The minister responds to what he hears, but he does not follow through on it. He is obviously receiving proposals. To what extent is it based on data? Is it based on intuitive hunches and conversations? At some point we have to be more skilled at bringing those two sides together, what we think we need and how we accomplish it.
The Chairman: By seeking the answers from our people at Statistics Canada, we can determine whether they are compiling such information. Then maybe we could make a recommendation later saying that you should be doing this, this and this to expand your program and build a bigger castle of which to be king.
Senator Andreychuk: Heaven forbid. We are not into expanding government.
The Chairman: We need more information. Does your department have any recommendations for the Government of Canada and the governments of the provinces on how we could better do our statistical work? If we are not doing what we should be doing, we would be pleased to have those comments included.
One more thing before you leave, if we find later that we need more information on statistics, would you be prepared to come back to another meeting?
Mr. Lynd: We certainly would, with pleasure.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Mr. Chairman, I have one last question. You talked about establishing closer working ties with the provinces. Quebec would probably be quite reluctant, or maybe I am wrong. If I am wrong, so much the better. In view of the fact that you are dealing with EDUCATIONal statistics, and EDUCATION is under the jurisdiction of the provinces, what is your hope of getting your council of -- I don't know how you call it exactly --
[Translation]
What is the likelihood of this actually happening?
[English]
Mr. Lynd: The Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council was created three or four years ago, and that council, which includes the Chief Statistician and the deputy ministers of all the ministries responsible for EDUCATION, has met twice a year and has always been attended by representatives of all ministers of EDUCATION, including Quebec.
They have been very willing to participate up to this point in time in Council of Ministers of EDUCATION activities and with the Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council, in other words, dealing with the Chief Statistician.
We have been running a number of joint projects with all of the ministries. One was the Pan-Canadian Indicators Project, and there will be a release on that tomorrow, I believe. Planning was done out of the Council of Ministers office. They said it would be tomorrow. It might be next week.
We have done a number of other things: A portrait of university level EDUCATION, a portrait of elementary secondary level EDUCATION, all of which was work done within the purview of the Canadian EDUCATION Statistics Council, of which Quebec played a very important part.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: That is encouraging because I think it is worthwhile to get everyone together to get a better picture of everything. If there is no resistance, it is good.
The committee adjourned.