The Pursuit of Postsecondary Education: A Comparison of First Nations, African, Asian, And European Canadian Youth (Report‪)‬

AS THE REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES will show, and the subsequent analyses will substantiate, Canadian young people of various cultural identities differ substantially in their educational aspirations, academic effort, and academic performance. They also come from homes that differ considerably in socio-economic status (SES) and cultural features, with their associated advantages and disadvantages. This paper explores the processes that link these factors to subsequent educational pathways among Canada's ethnic/racial population groups, both native-born and immigrants. Three main questions are addressed: First, to what extent can population group differences in educational pathways be attributed to socio-economic factors? Second, what is the role of cultural differences in social/familial supports, aspirations, academic performance, and effort? Third, are the underlying dynamics that propel educational pathways similar for these population groups? Explanations for the immigrant and visible minority disparities in educational outcomes differ in their focus on cultural versus structural factors (Kao and Thompson 2003). Cultural explanations emphasize achievement motivation, aspirations, and effort. The cultural explanation is typically employed to account for the superior outcomes of Asians and immigrants, but is eschewed as an explanation for inferior outcomes of North American Africans and aboriginals (Blair and Qian 1998; Chow 2000; Schmid 2001). For these groups, structural factors are seen as paramount, particularly parental SES and the advantages and disadvantages that accrue to them (Davies and Guppy 2006:120; Rumbaut 2005). While political sensitivities might well warrant these distinctive emphases, they nevertheless need to be empirically assessed. This paper examines simultaneously the role of both structural and cultural factors on the educational pathways of each of the population groups rather than assuming that structural factors are more important for explaining inferior outcomes and cultural factors for accounting for superior outcomes.