Blog Archives: July, 2002
Financial Barriers to PSE
An Interpretation of Financial Barriers to PSE in “Why Don’t They Go on? Factors Affecting the Decisions of Canadian Youth Not to Pursue Post-Secondary Education”
Douglas Stebila
University of Waterloo
2002/07/31
Introduction
The Canada Millennium Scholarship Fund recently released a commissioned study by E. D. Looker entitled “Why Don’t They Go On? Factors Affecting the Decisions of Canadian Youth Not to Pursue Post-Secondary Education”. Among the study’s observations is that 23% of youth who do not attend PSE cite financial barriers as the primary factor in their decision. We examine this percentage in context to find that a significant proportion of the respondents had no desire to pursue post-secondary education (PSE). We also note some recommendations from the study on how to improve accessibility.
Sources of data
The primary sources of data in Looker are the Foley (2001) study and the Brunson et. al. (2001) study based on a series of in-depth interviews.
Foley’s analysis examines those who completed high school but did not attend PSE and those who attended but did not complete PSE (who account for 20% of the sample). The study is based on the results of a question asking respondents to identify the most important reason for deciding against attending PSE. As Looker notes, “It is important to be careful when interpreting research reports of differences in post-secondary attendance that examine one variable at a time.” (Looker, 2) The relationship between factors influencing PSE attendance is complex, and as a result the picture obtained from such single-variable studies is limited.
The set of responses to the question “asking respondents to identify the most important reason why they did not continue beyond high school to attend university, college, or CEGEP” (Looker, 4) was as follows:
- Applied but was not accepted at school
- Couldn’t decide what to do
- Did not have enough money to continue
- Had a good job
- Had no interest in pursuing further education
- Illness
- Marks too low
- No program of interest was offered close to home
- Other
- Wanted to raise a family
- Wanted to take some time off from studying
- Wanted trade or vocational training
The Brunson et. al. study conducted interviews with 62 young people (aged 23 to 26) who did not attend PSE. The in-depth interviews give a better understanding of the interplay between the multitude of factors that resulted in the respondents not attending PSE, but suffers from a small sample size.
Brunson et. al. described two types of factors that affected decision making: barriers and reasons.
“The barriers identified included:
- Lack of awareness of PSE as an available option;
- Lack of money;
- Lack of academic ability and/or the presence of learning disabilities;
- Disruption to specific plans.
The reasons identified by these non-attendees included:
- Other activities/responsibilities had higher priority, including family obligations, work, and travelling;
- PSE was not seen as necessary or beneficial for the plans they had;
- The perception that work experience better prepared you for a future career than did further education;
- Given the job market situation, there was little likelihood of PSE providing an advantage;
- Given their personal characteristics at the time (lack of clear goals, lack of discipline, lack of readiness for PSE) there was little likelihood of PSE providing an advantage;
- Costs (in terms of time as well as money) were too high, relative to perceived likely benefits.” (Looker, 7)
Analysis
Looker performs an analysis of why youth do not attend PSE with the goal of understanding “the decision about how much education to take.” (Looker, 9)
As a result, the statements in the Looker analysis cannot be used directly to identify barriers in attending PSE for qualified and interested candidates. In particular, the fact that 23% responded “did not have enough money to continue” should not be immediately used to dismiss the role of financial barriers in attending PSE.
Although the Foley study only allows for a single response, there are many responses which suggest little to no desire on the part of the respondent to pursue PSE. In particular, we believe that respondents who gave the following responses may have had little to no desire to attend PSE:
- Wanted to take some time off from studying – 19.0%
- Couldn’t decide what to do – 12.7%
- Had no interest in pursuing further education – 10.0%
- Had a good job – 7.1%
- Wanted to raise a family – 2.2%
- Wanted trade or vocational training – 0.5%
Taken together, these factors constitute 51.5% of the responses. We emphasize that these alone cannot conclusively indicate the respondents’ desire to attend PSE, but note that this suggests a significant proportion of the respondents did not desire to attend PSE.
Taking into account the above observation, although 23% overall responded that they did not have the financial resources to continue, the proportion of those who desired to attend PSE but could not because of financial reasons must be significantly greater than 23%.
Future Directions
Two observations from the Foley analysis and the Looker study suggest possible avenues of immediate action for University administrators and students leaders.
Looker states that “the two studies also emphasized the importance of accurate and timely information about financial assistance programmes.” (Looker, 11) University administrators need to provide clear information about available financial assistance and minimize the barriers associated with obtaining such assistance. Student leaders need to communicate this information in meaningful ways at the appropriate time.
Foley notes that 26% of those who did not attend PSE indicated they “did not have enough money to continue”, whereas only 9% of those who attended but did not complete cited the same reason. “This suggests that financial barriers play a far less important role in PSE persistence than they do in the initial decision to pursue PSE.” However, Foley’s data is based on 1991 and 1995 surveys. There has been a trend in recent years for university scholarship programmes to emphasize entrance scholarships in place of upper-year and continuing education scholarships. Further clarification is needed in this area to allow university governors and administrators to better spend the limited financial aid funds.
Conclusions
Looker provides an analysis of factors affecting the decision of all youth who did not attend PSE. While only 23% of all youth who did not attend PSE identified financial barriers as the most significant reason, a non-trivial and significant percentage of the respondents had little or no inclination to attend PSE. Thus, of youth who wished to pursue PSE, a proportion significantly greater than 23% could not attend due to insufficient financial resources. Further study of the sub-sample who wished to attend PSE but did not would help clarify the significance of financial barriers in the decision for qualified candidates to not pursue PSE.
Acknowledgements
We thank Mark Schaan for his comments on entrance versus upper-year financial aid.
References
Cogem Research Inc. — Brunson, Liesette, Butt, Kerry and Déziel, Yves (2001). “Qualitative Assessment of Non-attendees? Decision Making and Attitudes towards Post-Secondary Education.” Prepared for the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation.
Foley, K. (2001). “Why Stop after High School?: A Descriptive Analysis of the Most Important Reasons that High School Graduates Do Not Continue to PSE.” Prepared for the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation.
Looker, E. D. (2001). “Why Don?t They Go On? Factors Affecting the Decisions of Canadian Youth Not to Pursue Post-Secondary Education.” Prepared for the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation.
