Intergenerational educational mobility over the past century in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young adults born at the end of the 20th century attend colleges and universities at much higher rates than did previous generations, which might give the impression of greater upward educational mobility and in turn, greater class mobility. This impression occurs, however, only because of structural expansion of the Canadian education system. In contrast to structural change, exchange mobility highlights the linkage between one's social origins and destinations. This speaks more directly to questions of equality of educational opportunity and social fairness. Greater fairness or social progress occurs when, over time, destinations become less contingent on origins. We examine intergenerational exchange mobility in Canada by investigating how, if at all, the linkage between parents' and their children's education has changed over the past century. We construct a longitudinal dataset covering the 20th century by merging fifteen cross-sectional surveys from Statistics Canada's General Social Survey (GSS) between 1986 and 2014. Comparing across synthetic birth cohorts we focus on transition probabilities, odds ratios, and logistic regression estimates to measure change. We contribute to a growing gap in the Canadian literature since social mobility has been largely neglected by sociologists as of late. We compare our results to recent findings of economists who examine intergenerational income mobility, another indicator of class mobility. Consistent with earlier sociological and economic research, our results show that despite the tremendous expansion of Canada's education systems, intergenerational exchange mobility for both women and men has been stagnant in Canada over the past century.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".