Publication
Culture, Tourism and the Centre for Education Statistics
Lifelong Learning Among Canadians Aged 18 to 64 Years: First Results from the 2008 ASETS
Costs and financing of education and training
Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please "contact us" to request a format other than those available.
Sixty percent of training activities had no costs and the training activities with costs were typically $400
Education program participants typically spent $2,500 to cover the costs for a program and costs varied by full-time/part-time status, program type and province
A higher proportion of education program participants used non-repayable rather than repayable sources to finance their studies
The use of non-repayable sources of funding varied by gender, age group, type of program and province
Canadian youth were more likely to use government student loans while adult learners were more likely to use non-government loans
Summary
Notes
Canadians who participate in education and training are faced with a variety of expenses depending on their individual circumstance and the type of learning activity that they undertake. Additionally, there are a variety of financial sources that students can use to pay for their education. Some, such as government student loans, bank loans and private loans from parents, family and friends, have to be paid back. Other sources are non-repayable such as money provided by parents, spouse or partner, family or other people and grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources.
As discussed in Section 2, although financial barriers were not the leading barrier to participating in education or training activities, a significant proportion of Canadians aged 18 to 64 (21%) reported it as a reason for not engaging in further learning activities. This section looks at the costs associated with education and training taken between July 2007 and June 2008, taking into account the basic costs such as tuition fees, books, supplies and equipment. This section also looks at how Canadians paid for their learning activities.
The ASETS collected information on costs differently for education and training activities. The ASETS asked education program participants to report on their education costs for tuition fees, books and supplies for their most recent program undertaken during the reference year and collected cost information for one randomly selected training activity undertaken during the reference year.
Sixty percent of training activities had no costs and the training activities with costs were typically1 $400
Around 60% of training activities undertaken by participants had no associated costs and 40% had associated costs. Training activities taken by females, 18 to 24 year olds, those with postsecondary education or less than high school and those living in Alberta were more likely to have costs. Conversely, training activities taken by Canadians aged 35 to 44, those with high school education and those living in Newfoundland and Labrador were less likely to have costs (Appendix Table A.3.1).
Among training activities with costs, the typical cost was $400. Training activities taken by Canadian youth aged 18 to 24, females, those with high school education and those living in Newfoundland and Labrador cost less while training activities taken by those aged 35 to 44, males, those with postsecondary education and those in Quebec cost more (Appendix Table A.3.1).
Education program participants typically spent $2,500 to cover the costs for a program and costs varied by full-time/part-time status, program type and province
The typical cost incurred by Canadians for an education program undertaken between July 2007 and June 2008 was $2,500 (Appendix Table A.3.2). It is not surprising that costs were higher for education programs versus training activities as the majority of education program participants were studying full-time for a longer period of time, while the average training participant invested 8 days in training between July 2007 and June 2008.
While the basic costs of education programs are generally the same for all students enrolled in similar programs at the same education level, expenditures vary depending on the type of education program and the province of study.
Full-time students in education programs typically spent $4,500 while part-time students spent approximately $1,000 (Appendix Table A.3.3). Due to the large variation in educational costs by course load, the remainder of the results on education program costs will be restricted to full-time students only.
Notable variations in educational costs existed across provinces and program type. Not surprisingly, those enrolled in high school programs reported the lowest total median educational expenses (Appendix Table A.3.4). In most provinces, high school tuition fees are not charged to students, but students are normally required to pay for supplies and some may incur fees. In particular, in some provinces, adults who attend a high school program are required to pay tuition expenses. University students reported the highest educational expenses. Among those studying full-time, university participants spent a median amount of $6,700, compared to $3,000 for those who participated in a professional association program and $2,300 for those enrolled in a non-university postsecondary program.
Educational costs also varied by age. Among full-time program participants, younger Canadians aged 18 to 24 spent a median of $5,000, while students aged 35 to 64 spent less than half this amount to finance their education. As seen in the Section 1, this may reflect the fact that younger Canadians are more likely to be enrolled in university programs than older Canadians.
As shown in Chart 3.1, full-time Canadian students who resided in Quebec had the lowest educational expenses in Canada. This may be due to many students being enrolled in college level programs (i.e. CEGEP) and to the nearly twenty-year tuition-freeze in Quebec that has kept tuition fees exceptionally low compared to other provinces. Although the tuition freeze was lifted in 2007, educational costs in Quebec remain relatively low. In contrast, full-time students studying in three of the four Atlantic Provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) reported the highest total educational expenses. Educational costs in Newfoundland and Labrador were below the national median.
Financing training activities
Although education programs require a larger financial investment than training activities, some Canadians do use sources of financing to pay for their training. As shown earlier in this section, 60% of training activities had no costs. Among training activities with costs, 56% were paid for by an employer, 38% were paid for by the individual and 2% were paid for by the government. The ASETS collected information on how participants paid for their training activities only if the training cost $1,000 or more. Among all training activities that cost more than $1,000 and were paid for by participants 88% were paid by using their savings.
A higher proportion of education program participants used non-repayable rather than repayable sources to finance their studies
Given the costs of education programs, Canadian students are turning to a variety of sources of non-repayable and repayable sources of support to help finance their studies.
Canadian program participants were more likely to use non-repayable sources of financing to pay for their education programs. As shown in Chart 3.2, almost twice as many program participants aged 18 to 64 used non-repayable sources of funding compared to repayable sources (52% versus 28% respectively). When examined by type of non-repayable source, a higher proportion of program participants received support from a parent, spouse or partner, family or other people compared to receiving support from a grant, bursary, scholarship or other source. When examined by type of repayable source, a similar proportion of education program participants used non-government student loans compared to government student loans.
In 2008, young adult students were less likely than in 2002 to have used money from family or a government or non-government student loan and more likely to have used grants and scholarships to finance their education
The sources of financing used by students aged 18 to 24 have changed over the six-year period between 2002 and 2008, as shown in Chart 3.3. With respect to non-repayable sources of financing, the proportion of students who relied on money from parents, spouse or partner, family or other people decreased from 60% in 2002 to 54% in 2008. In contrast, the proportion that used grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources increased from 26% in 2002 to 32% in 2008.
The use of repayable sources of funding has also changed over the six-year period. The proportion of students who used government student loans decreased slightly from 24% in 2002 to 22% in 2008, as well as non-government student loans (28% in 2002 to 16% in 2008).
Chart 3.3 Sources of financing among young adult students, 2002 and 2008
The use of non-repayable sources of funding varied by gender, age group, type of program and province
The overall proportion of education program participants who received financial support from a non-repayable source was the same for males and females but the type of support differed slightly by gender (Appendix Table A.3.7). A higher proportion of females (28%) than males (25%) received grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources whereas a slightly higher proportion of males received support from a parent, spouse or partner, family or other people (36% compared with 34% for females).
As shown in Chart 3.4, the proportion of students who received non-repayable financial support for their studies decreased with age. The majority (69%) of students aged 18 to 24 received non-repayable support. This proportion decreased to 17% for those aged 45 to 64. When examined by the type of support received, the difference between younger and older students was more pronounced for support from a parent, spouse or partner, family or other people than for support from grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources.
The type of program in which students were enrolled was also related to reliance on non-repayable sources of financing with a higher proportion of students in more expensive programs using non-repayable sources. Those taking a university program were more likely to receive funding that did not have to be repaid compared to students attending other programs (Appendix Table A.3.7). Across all types of programs, Canadian students more frequently reported receiving financial support from a parent, spouse or partner, family or other people than from grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources.
The proportion of students in formal education programs who received non-repayable financial support was the highest in Quebec and Saskatchewan and the lowest in British Columbia (Appendix Table A.3.7). When examined by type of non-repayable support, students in Quebec were the most likely to receive financial assistance from a parent, spouse or partner, family or other people. Canadian students studying in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island were the most likely to report having received a grant, bursary or scholarship and students in British Columbia were the least likely to receive grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources.
When analyzing the relationship between income and support from non-repayable sources, it should be noted that this report examines the income of the respondent and his/her spouse and not parental income. Using this definition, the proportion of Canadians with any form of non-repayable support decreased as their income increased (Chart 3.5). Intuitively, this is expected as the higher the income, the lower the need for financial support to cover the cost of education. In the lower income categories, Canadian students were more likely to rely on funding from a parent, guardian or spouse as opposed to obtaining funding through a grant, bursary or scholarship. This is primarily due to the large presence of 18 to 24 year olds in the lower income bracket. In contrast, Canadians in the highest income bracket were more likely to receive non-repayable funding from a grant, bursary or scholarship.
Place of birth of the student was also related to using non-repayable sources of funding. A lower proportion of students born outside Canada used non-repayable sources compared to those born in Canada (45% versus 53% respectively). Working Canadians who received support from their employer were also less likely to use non-repayable sources of funding for their educational programs (Appendix Table A.3.7).
Turning now to the use of repayable sources of financing, as stated earlier, less than one third (28%) of Canadian students aged 18 to 64 had a repayable loan: 17% used a non-government student loan and 16% used a government student loan. Variation in the use of repayable sources of funding existed by province, age group, gender, program type, personal income and place of birth.
In contrast to the proportion who used non-repayable sources of financing, there were gender differences in the proportion that used repayable sources (Appendix Table A.3.8). A slightly higher proportion of females than males used repayable student loans (30% versus 27% respectively). Although there were no gender differences in the proportion who received non-government student loans, females were more likely to use government student loans compared to their male counterparts (18% versus 14% respectively).
Canadian youth were more likely to use government student loans while adult learners were more likely to use non-government loans
As shown in Chart 3.6, the type of repayable loans used varied by age. Canadian youth aged 18 to 24 were more likely to have used government student loans compared to adult learners (those aged 25 to 64). In contrast, a larger proportion of adult learners preferred non-governmental student loans as opposed to government student loans to finance their education. This may be due to a number of reasons, such as older students being more likely to enroll part-time, to have higher income and to be able to negotiate flexible financing options from private lenders.
The type of program in which students were enrolled was also related to using repayable sources of funding with a higher proportion of students in more expensive programs using repayable sources. Canadian students taking a university program were more likely to use repayable sources of financing (34%), followed by those taking a non-university postsecondary program (29%). Among those taking a university program and a postsecondary non-university program, there was no difference in the proportion that used a government versus a non-government student loan (Appendix Table A.3.8).
Variations in the use of repayable sources of funding existed across provinces. A higher proportion of students studying in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island used repayable student loans to finance their education, whereas students studying in British Columbia were the least likely to use repayable sources of support (Appendix Table A.3.8). Atlantic regions had the highest government student loan take-up rates, while Manitoba had the lowest. Conversely, Manitoba had the highest proportion of students who used non-government student loans to fund their education.
As observed with the use of non-repayable sources of financing, personal and spousal income was also related to using a repayable source of financing (Chart 3.7). While it is intuitive that students in lower income categories are more likely to use repayable student loans compared to students with higher incomes, what is interesting is the difference in the type of student loan used by individuals in different income groups. Students in lower income categories were more likely to use government student loans whereas middle income groups were more likely to take-up non-governmental student loans.
Summary
The ASETS showed that costs and financing differ for training activities and education programs. Approximately 60% of training activities undertaken by participants had no associated costs. Among training activities with costs, the typical cost was $400.
The typical costs spent by Canadians participating in a formal education program were $2,500 and these costs varied by program type and intensity of study, with those studying full-time spending more than those enrolled part-time. The cost of full-time formal education varied across provinces, the lowest being in Quebec and the highest in three of the four Atlantic Provinces.
The ASETS showed that sources of financing have changed over the six-year period between 2002 and 2008. In 2008, a higher proportion of students aged 18 to 24 used grants, bursaries, scholarships or other sources, while a lower proportion used non-repayable money from parents, spouse or partner, family or other people and repayable government and non-government loans.
By using ASETS, differences in sources of financing between Canadian youth and adults can be examined. The results show that adults were generally more likely to use non-government loans and less likely to use government student loans than younger students. Further research could be undertaken using the ASETS in order to understand if there are differences between adults and youth in terms of their knowledge of government student loans or in the proportion who apply for student loans.
Notes
1. All references to "typical" amounts are to median values, which represent the value which divides the top 50% of reported amounts from the bottom 50%.
- Date modified: