Recently, The Vancouver Province published a commentary by Iglika Ivanova from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives offering "five reasons" all provinces should adopt lower tuition fees, similar to those in Quebec.
However, the best available evidence on the relationship between tuition fees and access to higher education, contradicts Ivanova's main arguments. Quebec's model of nearly free tuition does little to promote higher university participation rates or enhance access for low-income families.
A fundamental problem with Ivanova's argument is that there is very little evidence that cut-rate tuition causes significantly more young people to go to university. A simple comparison between Ontario and Quebec illustrates the point. In the past academic year, the average tuition for Quebec's undergraduates was $2,400. Average tuition in Ontario was $6,640, among the highest in the country. Ontario, however, has significantly higher university participation rates and attainment rates for young adults than does Quebec. The university attainment rate in Quebec for 25 to 34 year olds currently stands at 32 per cent, compared to 37 per cent in "high" tuition Ontario.
Clearly, rock-bottom tuition fees are not necessary to ensure high university participation rates. Tuition subsidies in Ontario and other "high" tuition provinces, combined with the availability of grants and student loans are sufficient to ensure that most qualified young adults pursue higher education. Ivanova further argues that cheap tuition is necessary to ensure access to university for low-income families.
In reality, high tuition Ontario does a better job of attracting students from low-income families than Quebec.
Existing tuition subsidies and loan programs in "high" tuition provinces are generally sufficient to ensure access for low-income families.
Shrinking the university participation gap between high- and low-income families is a worthwhile objective. However, the evidence suggests that investing in high quality, targeted early childhood education programs and efforts to improve high school education in low-income communities are smarter strategies than using scarce public dollars to drive tuition rates closer and closer to zero.
The Quebec model of nearly free tuition does little to promote access to higher education and human capital formation compared to the shared-cost approaches found in most other provinces. Rock bottom tuition therefore achieves few public benefits, while absorbing public resources that would be better spent on other priorities.
Ben Eisen and Jonathan Wensveen, Frontier Centre for
Public Policy.
