Does Money Matter?: Prospects for Higher Education in Ontario 9780773595552

Citation preview

Does Money Matter?

•

DOES MONEY MATTER? Prospects for Higher Education in Ontario

Marion R. Porter, John Porter, and Bernard R. Blishen

The Carleton Library No. 110 Published by Macmillan 0/ Canada in association wilh the Institute 0/ Canadian Studies, Carleton University

Copyright © Marion R . Porter, John Porter, and Bernard BUshell 1979

All rights reserved - no part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing fro m the publisher except by a reviewer who wishes to quote brief passages in connection with a review written for inclusion in a magazine or newspaper.

Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Porter. Marion R., 1922· Does money matter? (The Carleton Library; no. 110) Previous ed. published by the Institute for Behavioural Research, York University, 1973 under tit le: Does money matter? : prospects fo r higher education. ISBN ()..7705· 1744-7 pa . I . Students - SociOt.:conomic status - Ontario. 2. Education, Higher - Ontario - Costs. 3. Educational equalization - Ontario. 4. Student aspirations - Ontario. I. Porter, John, 192 1· 11. Blishen, Bernard R., 1919· III. Carleton University. Institute o f Canadian Studies. 1V. Title. V. Series.

LB2342.2.C3P67

1979

370.1 9 ' 341 '09713

Does MOlley A1a/ler? was first pub lished by the Institut e for Behavio ural Research , York University. 1973. It appears here, in an ex panded and revised form, by kind permiss ion of the authors.

Printed in Canada for The M acmillan Company of Canada Limited 70 Bond Street Toronto, Ontario M5B IX3

THE CARLETON LIBRARY A se ries of reprints, original works, and new collections of sou rce materi al relating to Canada, issued under the ed itorial supervision of the Institute of Canadian Studies of Ca rl eton University. Ottawa. Director of the Institute S. F. Wise General Edito< Michael Gnarowski Executive Editor Virgil D . Duff (Macmillan of Canada) Editorial Board B. Carman Bickerton (History) Dennis Forcese (Sociology) Dav!d B. Knight (Geography)

J. George Neuspiel ( La w) Thomas K. Rymcs (Economics) Derek G . Smith (Anthropology) Michael S. Whittington (Political Science) Publications Editor James H . Marsh

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

fO

the Revised Edition

Pre/ace to the First Edition

C hapter I: Chapte r II :

ix

xvi

Equality and Cos ts : T he Great Debate .

Social Class and Educational Opportunity

Chap ter III :

The Bright Ones

31 60

Chap ter IV :

Sex and A spirations

85

Chapter V: Chapter VI:

Fin anc ing a Univers ity Education Towards Equa lity

106 148

The Format ion of Aspirations: A Multivariate Analysis .

160

Appendi x B:

Met hodological Notes

185

Appendix C:

A Notc on the French-Speak in g Studen ts 196

Appendix A:

Noles

205

PREFACE TO THE REVISED EDITlON

•

In 1970, when the survey of Ontario high school students which provided th e data for this repor t was initiated, cdu~ ca lion was seen as th e means by wh ich many objectives of the society coul d be attai ned: amo ng them economic growth and equali ty of opportunity. There were two fo rces behind the enormous educational expansion of the sixties. One wa s the belief that contemporary, post-industrial society requires an eve r morc hi ghl y ed ucated labour fo rce, and that a more highly educated labour force wou ld increase productivity. increase the Gross National Product, and make everybody better off. The First Annual Review of the Economic Cou ncil of Canada urged a n increase in the numb er of people with bachelors dnd doctoral degrees, pointing out the gap th at existed between the United States and Canada in the numbers of university graduates a nd att ributing th e difference in productivity between the two countries to this gap. The other force behind th e educational expansion was the need to create a more equal, or at least a more just soc iety. Tn the Unit ed States. educa ti on was seen by so me as a mea ns of reducing in equalities in th e society. In Ca nada there does not seem to have been so clear a statement of that belief, but certai nly it was felt that expandi ng educati onal opportuniti es would lead to a more open society which would enable young people from all social backgrou nds to try for the unequal rewards. A soc iety in which all were free to compete for the prizes, and in which rewards we re based on merit rather than on social advantages was seen as a worthy goa l. In the R ise 0/ fhe Meritocracy. Michael Young had wa rned th at the consequence of a policy of eq uality of opportunity with rigorou s selec tion and promotion based on l.Q. wou ld be a more un equal society. The new upper class, chosen fo r their ability and train ed for their position, wo uld be confid en t of their right to rule and to receive ix

x

DOES MONEY MATTER?

superior rewards. The lower class wou ld have to accept their inferior position since they had arrived there as a result of fair competition. To avoid these evils the watchword became "accessibilit y" o r "equality of opportunit y thro ugh accessibili ty." One of the first statem ents of this as government policy in Ontario was in 1957 when the prov incial government announced "Our objective is to insure that no student who has the capacity will be deprived of the oppo rtu nity of att endin g university and deve lopi ng his talent s to the fullest exten t. " Access ibili ty was embraced, in ' what we now real ize were the golden sixt ies, because it was secn as a means of providin g eve ryo ne with the opportunity to develop his or her potential and to cont ribute hi s o r her talents to the soc iety. In most western liberal democ racies studies we re undert aken to try to de termine what barriers existed to education. Now, in the gloomy seve nties, th e arguments on which th e poli cy of accessibil it y was based see m inappropriate. Let LIS look at two of these basic arguments in turn : first the one th at sees ed ucation as primarily leading to economic growth, and then th e argument for equal ity of opportuni ty which wo uld give individuals th e oppo rtu nity to deve lop their potential and as a resu lt benefit both th emselves and soc iety. There were two aspects to the eco nom ic arg ument fo r th e expansion of education: first, that the post·industrial soc iety would require a more highly skilled and educa ted labour force, and seco nd , th at th e need for hi ghly educated scientists and engineers would be so great that shortages wou ld persist into the 1980s. Con temporary cond itions throw into question both these forecasts. Does today's labo ur force requ ire more education in jobs th an previous ones? The answe r of an increasin g numb er of writers is no. H arry Braverman, for exa mpl e, in Lab our and Monopoly Capital has present ed persua sive ev idence that th e sk ill content of jobs is decrea sin g rather th an increasing with the advance of scie nce and technology. And Ivar Berg in Th e Grellt Trainin g Robbery presents ev id ence th at th e increasing ed uca tional requirements for jobs arc not a result of th e in creasi ng co mpl exi ty of jobs, but rat her a res ult of th e de mand o n the part of empl oyers for educa ti onal crede n· tial s whi ch are unre lated to job co nt ent but instead serve as sc ree ning devices. So much for the labour force in general. What about the demand fo r highly educa ted perso ns? In 1959 Professo r K. Arrow, who was to receive the Nobel pri ze in 1972, argued

Preface to the R£'l'ised Edition

xi

that th e United States faced a re latively permanent shortage of research specialists, and American gove rnm ent manpower specialists predicted short ages into the 1980s. Instead, in the 1970s the su pply of college graduates in the United Statcs was such that, as Richard B. Freeman in The Overeducated American writes, "the unemployment of college graduates .. .. attained levels among new graduates that made the problem of finding a job - much less a good job - a reality, not a myth." He based thai statement on the fact that "In October, 1972 the rate of unemployment for graduates in the class of 1972 stood at 11.7 pe rcent, far in excess of the nation al average for workers (5.1 percent) and above that for high school graduates of about the sa me age (7.7 percent). Although no study similar to those of F reema n and Berg has been made in Canada, it seems reasonable to assume that there are parall els between the two countries with respect to manpower utilization. Certa inly it is in ev itable that there wil l be declining employment opportunities in some areas. For example, a very large proportion of graduates has trad itionally become teachers at the elementary and secondary levels. Now that the bulge of the post-war baby boom yea rs has passed through the hi gh schools there is a much lower demand for teachers. From a period of persistent shortages of teachers in the sixties there is now a surplus, in spite of th e fact that enrolm ents in teachers' co ll eges are restricted. Tn addition to the dem ographi c trend s th at affec t the job market for university graduates th ere are the financial restraints brought about by the economic situation. Of the thou sa nds of graduating students writing public serv ice examinations for government positions, only a few hundred each year are accepted. Many university graduates who do find jobs find themselves underemployed with neither the income nor the job satisfaction that th ey had been led to expect. It seems then that the expansion of the educational system to meet the need s of the economy ha s less validity for the future. What about the other reason for the expansion - to promote accessibi lity to provide equality of opportunity? Must this be re·examined too? One ca n well ask whether it is a service to yo ung people from disadvantaged families to enco urage them to continue th eir education after hi gh school if they cannot be assured of good jobs after undergoing several years of study. They wou ld have to work in the summe rs at menial occupa tions, if they can find them , save as much of their earnings as they can (the Ontario Students Assistance Plan, OSAP, requires a contribution from summer

xii

DOES MONEY MATTER?

ea rni ngs). live in penu ry during their post-seco ndary years. call on their parent s to make financial sac ri fices (OSAP requ ires a co nt rib ution from pare nt s depending o n their means), and borrow $1000 before they are eli gib le for a grant. If, having foregone the earnings they might have had if they had started to work immed iately after high school instead of continuing their education, th ey complete thei r studi es and find themselves wit h no be tt er prospects for employment but instead wit h a la rge debt, they might well question th e wisdom of having set o ut o n such an ex pedi ti on. Is accessibil ity still a va lid goa l? D ocs it matter a ny more wh eth er or not money matters? If on the one hand the labour force of a post-industrial society docs not require the level of educational attainment that we once thought it did. and on the ot her hand , a universit y degree no longer assures access to an interesting, we ll-paid job, shou ld our goa l now not be to cut back th e system, to reduce enrolments, and to use the money th at wou ld be saved fo r othe r pressi ng needs of the society? To look at higher education o nl y in terms of labour force needs or vocatio na l oppo rtunities is to take a .very narrow view of the functi ons of a uni ve rsi ty. Indeed, most who have written about the fun ctions of a uni versity see th e voca tional role as a subordinate one. To the trad itional functions of a uni versity - the disse minati on, preservation and advancement of knowl edge - some recent observers and participants have added the critical jUl/ction, the need for the uni versity to stimu late st ud ents to be crit ical of both the uni vers ity a nd the society. A lfred North Whitehead, writing almost thirty yea rs ago, saw th e functi on of the university to present know ledge, fired by the imagin at ion . He saw learning as a torch handed down from genera tion to gene rat ion and admitted that this torch could cause co nfl agrations from time to time, but suggested that thi s is a necessary price to pay fo r a free, open, inquiring society. When we are told that a uni versity's success ca n be meas ured by the success of its gradua tes in a n occupational world that requires conformity. loyalty to the SllIllls quo, and ad herence to establishment values, we can wo nd er whether the success of these graduates in the occupat ional wo rld docs not imply failure of the un iversity in its critica l funct ion. As o ne looks at the major social trend s emergi ng in our epoch, it is possible to see the threat of increas in g concentrations of power and decision mak in g. Science and techn ology which have done much to provide our high

Pre/ace to the Re vised Edition

xi ii

levels of product ivity have at the sa me time given extraordina ry power to the experts and those who con trol them. A related trend is the enormo usly expanded body of information availab le to decision makers who have at their di sposal, often exclusive access to hi ghly sophisticated machinery, physical and intell ectual, to make it usable for them. An important role for higher ed ucation is to develop citizens to ta ke a more active role in their communities against the structure of power. And in add ition, issues in the modern worle! arc so complex, th e consequences of decisions taken by governments so poten ti all y cataclys mic in th eir effect on peoples' lives, that it is essential to have an alert and informed cit izenry, capable of und erstan din g and questioning th e problems that arise if the society is to be in any real sense a democracy. . As well, for the individua l who is capable of benefitti ng from it, th e university experience is a reward ing and enriching one. "Knowledge is power" and " the truth shall make you free" are two statements that have become almost cliches, and like all cliches have lost their power to illuminate. Yet, in a real se nse, knowledge about o neself, the world around, histo rical processes and scientific principles does give a perso n grea ter power over his action s and thu s his destiny than does ignorance. The tendency for a university education to be regarded solely as job train ing, a nd for un iversity students to be primari ly interested in gett ing certified for the work wo rld has been a distortio n of th e real function of the university. Perh aps the realization that a university education docs not automati call y ensure a high level job will free our universities from the expectation that they are a preparation for a career. Nevertheless, even tho ugh the labour force as a whole does not require a high level of educational achievement, there always will be many jobs, perhaps eve n a n increas ing number, wh ich require high levels of training, including the skills of coordi nation and planning, skills which may be developed or at least enh anced through a university experience, and wh ich often requi re advanced learning. Univers ities are here to stay. It is imposs ible to imagine a world without them. The questio n is not whether they are to be elim inated but what the adm ission policy is to be. Arc we to continue to make them accessible or are we to move to more restricted enrolments? What if we abandoned a policy of accessibilit y o n the grounds that it is too expensive, wastefu l because we don't need a ll those highly educated

xiv

DOES MONEY MAITER?

people and, in fact, harmful because yo ung people who have job expectations that cannot be realized will become discontented? We would then have to turn to a policy of rest ri .ted enrolments, which already exist in the profess ional facu lties. The question then is how we shou ld select those who are to go. One way is of course by price: by raising tuition fees to a leve l that will ration th e places to those who can afford to pay. This is unthinkab le in a democrat ic society where, however high the fees are, there will remain a large component of public money supporting the univers iti es. It is unthinkable for reasons of fairness, but also for efficiency, since select ion by price will not result in the most ab le yo ung people, the ones who have the most to ga in and the most to offer, necessarily being chosen . Academic achievement, measu red either by high school performance or scores on aptitude tests is the most common method of selection. This would be to fo ll ow a policy of meritoc racy with its consequences of fierce competition, anguish as a result of missing out on the prizes, a nd waste since those who are likel y to benefit most are not necessarily those who can get the highest scores on tests at age 18 . A thi rd met hod of selecti on might be by lot. All appl ican ts wit h a minimum level of achievement would have an equal chance of being selected. This would in many ways be the fairest met hod of selecting if there mu st be selection, but it too see ms wrong to take a chance on exclud ing a possible fut ure Nobel prize winner, for those of superio r talent are a social asset. Some of the present critics of our expanded university system seem to suggest that we are now trying to educate everybody whether or not they have any aptitude for lea rnin g. This is of course ridiculous. Only 20 percent of {he young people between the ages of 18 and 24 are in post secondary education in Ontario, and of these, 14 perce nt are in universit ies and 6 perce nt in co mmunity colleges. The critics also imply that before the expansion things were beller. Anyone who can remember the frivolity of the few university campuses in earlier periods and the obsession with football ga mes, panty raids, and fraternities would find that hard to accept. A stro ng case can be mad e against crede ntialism: that certificates are simp ly a device used by employers to screen applicants, that they have little to do with the requirements of most jobs, and that they are a new form o f property and dcny oppo rtunity to those who don't have them. However, as

Preiace fO fhe Rel l ised Edition

xv

long as they exist as an entrance requirement for a job, everyone should have a chance to get th em. The case for accessibility still sta nds. It is, however, a policy which is expensive from the social as well as the indi vid ual point of view a nd which can lead to the belleroff bei ng ove r-rep rese nted, result ing in a subsidization of those who have more resources by th ose who have less. For the less we ll -off there always will be financial hazards which in turn can dampen enthusiasms or reduce in clinations to stay in the educational streams. It is not sufficien t then si mpl y to provide accessib ility and opportunity a nd to make money matter less than it did formerly; it is also importan t to know somethin g about the range of attitudes and val ues which mould aspi ra tions to take up opportuni ty when it is provided, and to locate those socio-cultu ral milieux where educational aspiratio ns a nd expectations are limited . For th is reason, particularly if education sho ul d shi ft its focus from labou r force need s to broader social objectives, the data which we collected in 197 t are still relevant to the problems and pol icy-making of the late 1970,_ In this revised ed ition we have brought up to date the policy changes in the provision of student assistance and some of the discuss ion about the apportioning of costs in view of the changed econom ic cond itions of the later 1!'70s. We have al so been able to co rrect numerous production errors that were co ntained in th e first ed ition. All these errors were in the text rath er than in the tables. We have also added. for the professional socio logists and others who might be interested, an appendix containing a multivariate model of aspi ration format io n employing multiple regress ion and path analytic techn iq ues. MRP

lP Carleton Un iversity BRB York University January, 1977.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION Sociolog ists are accused of several sins. It is alleged they deal with trivial and irrelevant matters. They hide their theoretical insights in "laborious webs of learning" and the result of their investigations in complex mathematical models. Consequently, they speak only to themselves and have DO message for the society in which they live. Of these misdeeds some are morc guilty than others. At the ri sk of disappointing so me of our professional colleagues, we present this short work in a way we hope will avoid so me of these all eged offences. The problem it addresses - how young people perceive their educational futures - is by no means trivial. The research was extensive, involving a sample of 9,000 Ontario high school stud ents about their hopes and expectations fo r education and work, and 3,000 of their parents about how they saw their children's educational futures. I n th is volume we present some of our findings which we think will be of most interest to educational policy-makers and all those concerned for greater equality in education. We present them in the simplest fas hion, asking th e reader to concentrate on relatively straight forward statistical tables and to follow a commentary which we hope will be found clear and concise. Our reason fo r presenting ou r data in this way at th is time is that in Ontario, and in other provinces no doubt also, policies are being developed to distribute the costs of higher education in a way which is thought to be more equitable than at present, when such a large proportion of th e total costs are paid from public funds. The federal and provincial governments are attempting to work out their resp ective responsibilities in the shari ng of these costs and in achieving equity. What constitutes equity is a subject upon which there is much d isagreem en t, as those who have followed the great de~ate about the costs of high er education over the last decade well know. The debate con tinues and we feel that some of our data can help to inform it because stude nts' aspirations and prospects are und oubtedly affected by financial co nsiderations, and by their knowledge of how the postsecondary system operates and of the financial ass istance that is ava il ab le. Major changes designed to shift a greater part of the costs of higher education onto the student are bound to have furt her effects on their prospects.

Preface to the First Edition

xvii

If sociology is to contribute to public policy, findings must not be available only in a fashion which can be understood by those involved , but must also be timely. There is litt le point in prese nting policy-makers with data about an educational system which they have already changed, or data that would throw light on a student assistance plan long after onc has been implemented . Unfo rtunate ly, social resea rch is necessarily a par t-time activity in our universities, carried on by people whose main responsibilities are teaching. The time required between the beginning of a research project and the analysis of results can mean a missed opportunity to contribute to current discussions. Therefore, we decided to present the data in this preliminary form. Social researchers also have obligations, fulfilled with less urgency, to th e fundamental and the timeless. Accordingly, we continue to be engaged in an intensive analysis of the fo rmation of educational and occupational aspirations. In that work, in which we look at a much wider range of social and demographic variables than we do here, we are employing such multiva riate techniques as path a nalysis and multiple classification a nalysis. Meanwhile, in this volume we have demonstrated th at educational and occupational horizons of Ontario high school students are bounded by th e class structure of the socicty in which they live; that, associated with that class structure, thcre is a wastage of bright young people from the ed ucation al process; and that girls, particularly lower class girls, see themselves destined for the labour force and excl uded from the learning force in greater proportions than boys of the same class level and boys or girls from the classes above th em. No amount of multivariate analys is or causal model building will alter these fa cts, although they no doubt help to elucidate th e way in which social class has its effects (through intervening factors such as school programs, academic achievement, and the encouragement of parents and ot hers) on the level of aspirations for both education and career. For those fam iliar with the sociology of ed ucation these findings will not be striking. However, th ere is no study which lays out for Ontario in such a complete manner the relationship between social class and educational prospects. We have often been told by government officials that things are different in Ontario, that th e problems of educational opportunity have been solved or that th e solu tions are at hand. These findings say otherwise, and for that reaso n thi s report is in the tradition of expose research. In addition to examining the problem of educational pros-

xvi ii

DOES MONEY MArTER?

pects in a society of inequal it y, we wa nt ed to test so me of the assumpti ons which lie beh ind existing studen t assistance plans as we ll as some of those now being advocated, if not specifically planned for. That is why in Chapter I we review at some lengt h th e main points of the controve rsy of the last few years about who should pay for our unive rsities and colleges, and the main types of schemes which have been suggested to make students pay more of the costs. Central to these discussions has been the qu estion of whether th ese schemes by affecting high-school students' percept ions o f their chances, would act as inducements or impediments to accessibility to higher educa tion. Subsequent chapters are concerned with exploring, from th e stud ents' point of view and sometimes from their parents,' how money really matters to their prospects. In Chapter II we show how st riking is the relationship between social class (measured on a scale of father's occupation, education, and income) and important aspec ts of education. From these dat a we feel safe in inferring that family finances must be a factor in the limited educat ional horizons of lower class youth. This is not to say that the so-called nonfinancial or cultural factors are non-ex istent or do not playa part. We felt, however, th at to ove r-emph asize them is to forget that social class is the stru cture of inequality and deprivation, and that the absence of family resources helps to create attitudes and prospects of limited life chances, so that the cultural fac tors become adaptations to th e inequality of the society. To state, as some have, that money does not matter because of these attitudes and va lues which mediate, seems delib eratel y to be avoiding steps to make education more accessible. In Chapter In we attempt to show th e proportions of those of greater ab ility and hi gher achieve ment who are lost to the sys tem when they are exa mined in terms of their social class origins. In Chapter IV we compare males and females in much th e sa me way. Chapter V attempts to get at th e questi on of whether money matters direct ly. We asked both students and parents questions about how they saw the financing of a post-secondary education. We tried to find out what they knew about requirements for entrance, the ava ilability of financ ial assistance, what the costs were, and whether they had made a ny provisions to meet them. In some respects the answers were puzzling. Despite this bewilderment, we feel the results demo nstrat e some important things. Certainly there is widespread ignorance and lack of planning fo r after high school on the part of fam ilies. Then there is the sur-

Preface to the First Edition

xix

prising finding that under certain circumstances lower class c!lildren are prepared to borrow considerable sums of money to see themselves through university. We feci that, in some measure, we have achieved our purpose of informing the present debate about accessibility to ed ucation beyond high school. I n Chapter VI we make some suggestions about how the post-secondary system might develop to better serve the principle of equality. Discussion on this point is not easy because equality of condition and equality of opportunity are often confounded. Many contributors to the debate seem satisfied with equalit y of opportunity, in which attempts are made to equalize conditions at the start of a race for unequal rewards. If equality of opportunity is coupled with accessibility, that is if higher education is opened to all with minimal standards, then the system becomes very costly. That is the problem with which policy-makers are now faced . However, if at the same time the society at large were to move towards equality of condition, in which the financial rewards from higher education would be reduced, either by taxing the higher incomes which the better educated receive or by reducing the differentials in income, then higher education would probably not be as attrac tive. rt would ce rtainl y be more optional, and less costly. Neither financial rewards nor prestige rewards from "conspicuous consumption" would accrue to the individual as they do on the present scale. Prestige would derive from the doing of worthwh ile things. Quite clearly, equality of condition is a low priority in the value structure of Canadian society, as the recent tax reforms and debates surrounding the Carter Commission indicate. In these circumstances, accessibility is probably a fiction created more to serve politica l purposes than the value of equality. Since our society is based on inequality, many of our social policies are interstitial, inadequate patchwork. and minimally redistributive. In our final chapter we indicate some of the difficulties with a policy of accessibility in a society which is not prepared to change income inequalities, and we suggest how the utilization of the resources of higher education might be more equitably distributed. We are not so naive as to think, however, that educational reform alone can create a society of equality. It is very difficult for anyone, wh atever their political persuasion or value orientation, to reconcile the contradiction between equality through accessibility and continuing inequality of condition. Therefore, our suggested solution of

xx

DOES MONEY MATTER?

higher fees a nd grants and the abolition of loans for students from lower income fami lies might seem im possib le to ac hieve. Obviously. this p roposa l would requ ire yet a further increase in public funds, a nd while such an in crease remai ns possible only thro ugh th e continuing regressive ta x stru cture, the situ a tion will continue to rese mbl e so met hin g of a vicious circle. Howeve r, o ur inte ntio n in thi s volume is not to construct a new stud ent awa rd plan. We merely suggest in general terms the direction in which we thin k change must go. Nor is it OUf inte ntion to prese nt a n ex tended argument for equality. Philosophers a nd socia l scientists have been arguing for and aga inst equali ty for a very lo ng time. We fully intend to take up th e matter as we proceed with further anal ysis, but the limitations of the present volume preclude its inclusion here. The survey of Ontario Students' Aspirations (SOSA) coul d not have been conducted without the cooperation of a large number of people and the combination of a variety of skills. Douglas Dale of the Math ematics Department of Ca rleton University designed the sa mple. The adm ini stration of the qu estionnai res and th e ment al ability tests in the sa mpl ed schools across th e province, and the interviews with parents were conducted by the Survey Research Centre of the Institute for Behavioural Research at York University. The Centre also did th e coding and punching of data cards. An ou tl ine of these field procedures can be found in Appendix B. Fu rther data processing, file building a nd transform ation s were done with the cooperation of the Computing Ce ntre of Carleton Un iversity. In th is difficu lt and technica l task W. 1. Bradley, Sidney Gilbert and Hugh McRoberts we re indispensable. Maria Ba rrados and Susa n Russe ll also assisted in th is stage of the SOSA projec t. We a re gratefu l to R. A. Wendt for his careful read ing of a draft of the manuscript. The SOSA project was undertaken with a g rant from the Canada Council. T his pub lication was supported by financi al aid from Carleto n University a nd fr o m th e Institute for Behavioural Research at York University. We are pleased to acknowledge thi s support. MRP jp

Carleton University BRB Trent and York U niversi ti es August, 1973

CHAPTER I

EQUALITY AND COSTS: THE GREAT DEBATE

Some cu rtailm ent of the growth of public expend iture on higher educa tion might be accomplished with out any sign ifican t adverse effects on th e quantity a nd quality of higher education by reversing the trend towa rds a declining proportio n of expenditu re covered by student fe es. But under any arrangements th at might be adopted to this end , it wo uld be essential to make sure that no youn g person who has th e ability and mo tivat ion for high er edu-

cation should, as a result of inadeq uate current access to financ ial resources be depriv ed of an opportunity to proceed with higher educa ti on,l This stateme nt by the Economic Co un cil of Canada summarized the concern of federa l and provincial government officials in the early seven ti es to maintain and even to extend pos t-seco nda ry educational opportunity, which had been one o f th e main policy object ives of the sixt ies, and at the sa me time to reduce the proport io n of the expe nditures on higher education that are paid by the public treasury. The reason for the concern is clear. Th roughout Canada there was a phenomenal increase in enrolments in pos tseco nda ry institutions. Because of improved fac ilities. the establishmcnt of comm uni ty colleges, and highcr sa lar ies fo r university teachers, there was an even sharper ri sc in expenditures. Full-time enrolments at all post-secondary institutions in creased during the decade of the sixties from 163,143 in 1960-6 1 to 5 13,358 in 1972-73, an increase o f 214 perce nl. ' The tota l expendi tu res on pos t-secondary instit ut ions, capital and operat ing, increased in Canada from about 33 million dollars in 1960-6 1 to over two and one-ha lf bill ion do ll ars in 1973-74, an increase of 800 percent. 3 For Ontario the in-

2

DOES MONEY MATTER?

crease in enrolm ent s was 285 perce nl , fro m 48,77 1 to 187,716. The in crease in expe nditures was 820 percent , from S II 7,759,OOO to S 1,083,279,000. In its First A mlllal Review in 1964, the Eco no mic Counci l of Ca nada had po int ed ou t the great sho rt ages in Ca nad a of highl y sk illed and professional man power and the need to develop ed ucati onal po licies to overco me th ese shor tages in o rder to achi eve ou r eco nomic goa ls.