A methodological error was used by the government and the effect of minimizing the impact of rising tuition fees for much of the population.
It has been said that rising tuition fees had no effect on enrollment at university. What is wrong. After rising 1989-95 there has been a decline in 13 % the number of students in tray (Note 1, page pdf 38, document 49).
But, what is first and foremost importance, this is not the number of entries but the graduation rate. Whether, the number of students who pass through the rise and who will graduate.
Here are some statistics :
RISING UNEMPLOYMENT :
– Following the rise in tuition 1990-1995, rising unemployment 10,4 to 13,2 % (+2,9%) of 1990 to 1993 while the number of people of working age for entering university or the labor market decreased 5 %.(2) Then drop in unemployment 13,2 % to 8,3 % (-4,9%) of 1993 to 2005 (Note 1, page 19). As the indexed cost of university fees decreases, the graduation rate increases and unemployment falls.
– Rising unemployment 7,1 points for no university degree in 1993 compared with 1990 following the rise of tuition 1990 to 1994. 1,7 point higher than the Canadian average.
– Then unemployment rate loan 5 points higher than the Canadian average of 1996 to 2005. (1, page 21)
FALL OF PART-TIME STUDENTS :
– Drop of almost 20% the number of part-time students after the rise 1990-1994. Workers who study part-time or who want to retrain were probably the first affected by higher, delaying or permanently withdrawing their higher education. (1, page 38-39)
-Do not forget that a part-time students not eligible for loans and grants.
-A student and part-time can not deduct tuition from their taxes because it does not pay tax.
FALL OF THE GROWTH RATE OF THE UNIVERSITY DEGREE :
– Rising tuition 1990 to 1994 curb growth in the number of registration was increasing year by year. (1, page 38-39)
FALL OF THE INCREASE IN PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN AT THE UNIVERSITY
– The increase in the percentage of women full-time at the 1st cycle was stopped after a few years to progress to higher 90-94 and increase the percentage of female part-time has regressed even after the rise. (1, page 38-39)
FALL OF THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY
– Reduction 10% Most university student between 1991 to 1998 following the rise of 1991-1994. (1, page 44-45) while the number of people of working age population to their university entrance was hautoe of 14% of 1992 to 1999 (2). Which means a decrease of total theoretical 24 % Most university students following a rise of 300 % tuition between school years 1989-90 to 1994-95 (1, page 55).
-While the population of students graduating from colleges is stable(8, page 14)
FALL OF DEGREE COMPLETION RATES
– While the cohort of students 1993-1996 had a graduation rate of tray 30% this rate had fallen to 25% cohort 1997-2000. Whether, a lower graduation rate 17% (2, page 52), (3, page 3). It will take more 10 years to return to the same graduation rate of 30 %.
– The percentage of graduates was 9% higher 10 years after rising from 22 to 30% graduation as the impact of the increase is reduced by inflation.(9)
REVENUE LOSS OF GOVERNMENTS
– The government is doubly penalized by reducing the number of university graduates or delaying their graduation. In 2 If the government is largely deprived of income taxes and taxes exceed the savings. Graduates obtaining their tank averaged 26 years(4, page 10), 24,4 years for Quebec home (in 2003) but, 26 years for all students in Quebec 2005 (5, page 17 and 58) the government would lose tax revenue difference between a non-graduate and graduate for an average period of 3 years of income, as in the rest of Canada, since the tank would normally be obtained 23 years. And 32 for master instead of the average theoretical 25 years, whether 7 years later (5, page 58).(7)
– Not to mention the back taxes and taxes lost in the rising number of unemployed.
– Strongly that a tax calculation how the government lost, until now and for future years in lost revenue, consequence of the, about, 100 000 people who have not pursued their higher education as of today.
Not to mention that higher tuition will not help the following facts :
– Graduation rates up 2 or 3 times lower among remote (grand North) and a university town (eg Quebec) (5, page 14).
– 2 times more university graduates than among wealthy disadvantaged(5, page 15).
– The economic argument does not take the road to justify an increase, unless we adopt a viewpoint so ultra-conservative, short-term.
– Since the medium and long term losses of government revenues are above the provincial savings, not counting the loss to other palliers. (10)
OUTLOOK :
– While the index number of academic jobs is steadily increasing from the index 100 in 1990 to 192 in 2005. (1, page 22) It has night to university education while demand is rising steadily.
– Note that there may be a population decline, therefore costs, of 17 % the number of university students in Quebec by 8 years (page 14)*. Decrease in the number of students 21% d'ici 10 years(2), which invalidates the need for higher tuition.
– For now rising tuition fees could prevent thousands more, see tens of thousands of people each year, access to higher education.
– Which is totally against productive since we have long known that we are heading towards a shortage of manpower with the retirement of baby boomers begins.
– In light of past consequences of rising tuition, Quebec in danger of sliding into recession with rising tuition, if not over a long period of stagnation, as was the case during the year 90, following the rise of tuition 1990-95 .
ETHICS DEBATE :
– Beyond the economic debate must first and foremost discuss the right to free education and free, as is the case in dozens of countries(6) and more and more countries, including those with the strongest increases economic (Brazil, China, India, etc.).
– It will look at a Canadian constitution (invalid because never approved by referendum) outdated that guarantee the right to primary and secondary education, legacy of an era or person, or almost, was not going to university.
– And can we bully a right as fundamental as the right to education? Even if it prevented one person to have access to higher education?
Then we have the right to ruin the dream of another 100 000 people?
And besides having to keep a higher tax rate because there is less academic to share expenses.
Yves Marineau
Sociologist
Sources :
(1)Statistics Canada :
www.crepuq.qc.ca/IMG/pdf/indicateurs-2.pdf (page numbers given are those of the PDF document, add 11 to the page number in the document.)
(2)Statistics Canada :
http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/donstat/societe/demographie/pyramide_age.htm
(3)Discover :
(4) Institute for Policy Research :
www.irpp.org/fr/pubs/IRPPStudy/IRPP_study_no8.pdf
(5) Ministry of Education :
www.mels.gouv.qc.ca/stat/bulletin/bulletin_33.pdf
(6) Wikipedia (partial list) :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_education#List_of_countries_with_free_post-secondary_education
(7) I asked the Quebec statistical average age of graduation for the years following the rise in tuition 90-95 but I have not yet received the results of today's date (2012-05-07). One can guess that the increase had a negative effect since the number of students had decreased. So there is a time-frame for obtaining the tray, in the period following an increase in fees. Which means loss of revenue to government,.
(8) http://www.crepuq.qc.ca/IMG/pdf/Evolution_Demande_etudes_1ercycle_janvier2011.pdf
(9) The number of foreign students increased significantly, the real rate of graduation was decreased but the data is fragmentary for only non-college graduate is difficult to know the exact level, see (8), page 20).
(10) See: “Rising tuition forgiveness saves ...! Costs 2 billion per year to the Québec government”
N.B. 1- Figures are rounded.
2- I did this research volunteer in a day or two. These preliminary results thus requiring deeper. This work would be done by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Finance provided that deputy ministers be neutral, politically independent and honest. Therefore, not appointed by the Government, but by the people, to ensure that the government take its decisions based on truthful and non-results hijacked by special interests. And study results should be released.
Reproduction authorized provided the source is acknowledged : http://yvesmarineau.com/blog/?p=232
Pingback: Adverse effects of rising tuition | Politicoglobe
Pingback: Letter to Ministers of Education and Revenue | Yves Marineau
Pingback: Rising tuition saving… pardon! Costs 2 billion per year in provincial government | Yves Marineau