Participation in Post-secondary Education in Canada: Has the Role of Parental Income and Education Changed over the 1990s?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the extent to which the relationship between participation in post-secondary education and family background, namely parental income and parental education changed between 1993 and 2001. The results support a long-standing pattern that university participation rates are highest among youths from high-income families and of highly educated parents. There is no evidence to suggest that this relationship between university participation and family background changed over the 1993-2001 period. Although university participation rates generally rise as family incomes increase, there is little difference in participation rates among youths from modest-income (below $75, 000) and low-income families. Overall, the correlation between university participation and family income changed very little between 1993 and 2001. Next, when taking account of both parental education and parental income, university participation rates are more strongly associated with parents' level of education than with their income. The paper discusses significant data gaps and concludes that these data gaps do not have important implications on conclusions about the relationship between post-secondary education and family background throughout the 1993-2001 period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".