Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia
[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]
I received an email from colleagues complaining about how difficult it is to obtain comparable data about elementary and secondary schooling in Canada. “That’s the truth,” was my frustrated and, I am sure, frustrating reply.
The decentralized nature of Canada's education system makes gathering comparable data from each of the Canadian provinces and territories in the context of elementary, secondary, and, for that matter, post-secondary education challenging. Each province and territory in Canada has jurisdiction for its education systems. That autonomy leads to subtle, but important, differences that make inter-provincial comparisons difficult. Differences among provincial systems, policies, and curricula lead to variations, albeit often minor, in what is taught, how it is taught, standards for student achievement, and almost everything else. As a result, data collected from one region may not be directly comparable to another.
Further complicating the matter is the fact that methods, standards, and timing of data collection vary across provinces and territories. This includes differences in the types of data collected, the tools, and technologies used for data gathering, and the metrics for measuring educational processes, performance, and outcomes.
Those seeking to make comparisons will no doubt notice that the academic year, the age at which children enter, and the number of hours of instruction differ from province to province. These variations affect the comparability of data related to enrollment, progression, and attainment.
For those who seek to make comparisons and are cognizant of the need to control the variations affected by system differences and the demographic differences among provinces, obtaining data is a challenge. The willingness of provincial and territorial governments to participate in national data collection initiatives varies, influenced by political, fiscal, and administrative priorities.
Canada lacks a centralized data repository. Without a centralized national database for educational data, collecting, standardizing, and comparing data from different regions is complex and resource intensive. Canada needs a coordinated approach and standardized guidelines for data collection and sharing across Canada's educational jurisdictions to facilitate meaningful comparative analysis. The Councils of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) tries to address the need for comparable data.
The Pan-Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP) is a partnership between CMEC and the Canadian Education Statistics Council, a body jointly chaired Statistics Canada and CMEC. It tries to provide a set of statistical measures on education systems in Canada using in accordance with common data standards and definitions. When I served as deputy minister of education for BC, I co-chaired the Canadian Education Statistics Council with the Chief Statistician of Canada. I saw first hand how challenging it was to produce data that would enable comparisons across jurisdictions.
Despite considerable effort, the available data about elementary and secondary schooling are meagre. In fact, as far as achievement data are concerned, PCEIP depends greatly upon the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP). PCAP, conducted by the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), assesses the abilities of 13- and 16-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science. PCEIP also depends on the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) that examines the performance of 15-year-olds in mathematics, reading, and science.
Those of us interested in cross-jurisdictional comparisons look to PCEIP, the Canadian National Household Survey, the Census, and the Labour Force Survey and try to assemble data that would enable meaningful interpretation. It isn’t easy.
We also seek data from the provinces and territories, but transparency and availability of educational data vary significantly among Canadian provinces and territories. Some regions are known for being more open and forthcoming with their educational data. I wish all provinces were as open about data as British Columbia. More than a decade ago, BC became the first province to ‘publish’ its data under an open license.
BC makes a data catalogue available to the public. I often seek data about student performance, enrollment statistics, and graduation rates from the data warehouse. There are data that I want that I cannot find there. Attendance data are something I am looking forward to seeing. But getting there means the province will need to establish common definitions and data collection procedures to ensure that the data provided by one school or district is comparable with another.
Ensuring comparability in data is crucial for
accurately understanding trends and their broader implications. This requires
standardized methods for collecting data, uniform definitions across studies,
consistent measurement units, and synchronized timeframes for data collection. These
goals are not overly complex but achieving them demands significant political
commitment and administrative effort. British Columbia has exemplified such
commitment and effort. However, the relative consistency in the PCEIP reports
over time suggests a limited commitment from provincial politicians, regardless
of their party, to understanding educational trends and their implications.