Participation in postsecondary education

The regressors used in the model included a variety of socio-economic variables, a dummy variable to represent the SLID panel to which the participant belonged (-1 for 1998, 1 for 2001), as well as interactions between the socio-economic variables and the time variable. [...] In their paper, the university participation rate for the 18 to 24 year olds from the highest income group was “in the neighborhood of 40%”, whereas, the rate for the 18 to 24 year olds from the lowest income group was around 19% in 1997. [...] Also, for a fixed reference value (value cited on the right in the pair), the farther the ratio is from one, the stronger the impact. [...] The differences in postsecondary education systems determined to a large extent the participation patterns in different regions Given the notable differences in the postsecondary systems of different provinces, it is not surprising that participation pattern varied a great deal between the regions. [...] This model is also based on Knighton and Mirza (2002); the differences between their model and this one are the same as discussed for the model in Table 2. The results are presented in Table 4. Odds ratios greater than 1.0 indicate a higher likelihood of choosing university over college for the value cited on the left in the pair.