DOMINION BUREAU OF STATISTICS

0^1

^/

R. H. Coats, LL.D., F.R.S.C, F.S||i Dominion Statistician. I |U

Reprinted from Volume XI

mi y»ifej

'.S.S.

hiMWis.

fl^

JVESfTS

||^sif^^|^|/|i^|l931

Census Monograph No. 5

Illiteracy and School Attendance

(A study based on the Census of 1931 and supplementary data) MURDOCH c. Maclean

Published by the Authority of The Honourable W. D. Euler, M.P., Minister of Trade and Commerce

OTTAWA

J. O. PATENAUDE, I.S.O.

PRINTER TO THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY

1937

PREFACE

The present study of ijliteraoy and school attendance is, as far as possible, supijlementary to an earlier study published in connection with the Census of 1921, i.e., it covers new ground in all respects except in so far as it verifies and brings up to date the findings of the earlier study. The main difference between the two is that the 1921 monograph portrayed illiteracy and school attendance from the point of view of the educationist as ai technologist, the present monograph from his point of view as a sociologist. The two studies, then, are in most respects two parts of one study.

The conclusions of the present monograph are that census data on illiteracy and school attendance, while valuable as descriptive of and measuring the conditions and progress of these attributes as such, are still more valuable as measures of symptoms of social phenomena which are not directly measurable. In other words they measure the population conditions which deter- mine the status of illiteracy and school non-attendance but which also determine other statuses, a more important matter than measuring the influence of illiteracy and school attendance upon the population. The two attributes .are symptomatic of a class different in several respects from the class possessing the opposite attributes. The attendant evils of illiteracy are not removed by the removal of illiteracy. Its cause must also be eradicated, and this cause has many anti- social effects in addition to illiteracy.

The study is divided into two parts, the first (Chapters I-V) dealing with iUiteracy and the second (Chapters VI-X) with school attendance. Part III is devoted to basic tabular material to which the reader is referred throughout the text. The summary of the whole coming before these parts is consistent with the general plan of the series of monographs and will be found useful to the reader who is more interested in the findings than in the arguments on which they are based. The study was carried out under the direction of Mr. M. C. MaoLean by the Staff of the Social Analysis Branch of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Miss E. M. Carmichael of that Branch directing the preparation for press.

,• R. H. COATS,

Dominion Stalisiician. NovEMBEn 18, 1937.

47652—4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

Preface 3

Synopsis •. 9

Index map of Canada by counties or census divisions 16

Summary ' 17

PART I

Illiteracy

I — Statements on Literacy and Illiteracy in Canada 26

II — Comparison of Illiteracy in Canada with That in Other Countries 41

III — Improvement in the Illiteracy Status of Canada with the Passing Years 48

IV — Social and Economic Concomitants of lUiteracy 60

V — Literacy and Conjugal Condition 76

PART II

School Attendance

VI — Statement of the Present Status of School Attendance 82

VII — Extent and Direction of Changes in School Attendance during the Century 90

VIII — Influence of Physical Environment and Population Content upon School Attend- ance 102

IX — Influence of Home Environment upon School Attendance 108

X — Years Spent at School by the Population of the Prairie Provinces as Reported in

the Census of 1936 118

PART III Tables

Table 1 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over,

including and excluding Indians, by sex, rural and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 126

Table 2 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over arranged in descending order of percentage illiterate, Canada, by counties or census divisions, 1931. 128

Table 3 — Percentages illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by quinquennial

age groups, sex, rural and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 131

Table 4 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

broad racial and age groups, sex, rural and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 134

Table 5 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

birthplace, Canada, 1931 135

Table 6 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by age group and sex, Canada, 1931, compared with the United States, 1930 and Bulgaria, 1926 135

Table 7 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over,

rural and urban, Canada and the United States at latest census dates 136

Table 8 — Scatter diagram showing frequency distribution of 500 cases of percentage illit- eracy arranged in intervals and ascending order of size, by intervals of percentage improvement in five years from date of occurrence of percentage illiteracy, Canada, 1931 136

Table 9 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 5 years of age and over,' by

quinquennial age groups, Canada, 1931 and 1921 137

Table 10 — Actual and expected population alive, and number and percentage illiterate, by

quinquennial age groups, Canada, 1931 '. 137

Table 11 — Immigrant population and number arriving between 1921 and 1931, Canada,

1931 137

Table 12 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

certain age groups and sex, Canada and provinces, 1931 and 1921 138

Table 13 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

nativity, sex, rural and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 and 1921 141

5

6 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Con. PART in— Con.

Tables— Con.

Page Table 14 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

racial origin, nativity and sex, Canada, 1931 and 1921 142

Table 15 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by birthplace, Canada, 1931 and foreign-born illiterates of corresponding racial origin, Canada, 1931 and 1921 144

Table 16 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over,

Canada, by counties or census divisions, 1931 and 1921 145

Table 17 — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over (a)

Canadian-born, (b) total, by sex, cities of 30,000 and over, 1931 and 1921 148

Table 18 — Immigrant arrivals 10 years of age and over, by quinquennial age groups and year of immigration, and percentages illiterate, by quinquennial age groups, in the population as a whole, with expected number illiterate in each age group of those arriving in each year, Canada, 1931. . . .' 148

Table 19 — Families with and without children and number, and number per family of children, by kind and age group, and other dependents, in families with two married heads, by literacy of heads, Canada, 1931 149

Table 20 — Families with and without dependents and number, and number per family of children, by kind and age group, and other dependents, in famihes with one head only, by marital status, literacy and sex of head, Canada, 1931 '. ■ " . 149

Table 21 — Number and percentage ilUterate of own children, by age groups and marital

status and literacy of head of family, Canada, 1931 150

Table 22 — Number of families in each tenancy class, by marital status and literacy of heads,

for urban families, Canada, 1931 150

Table 23 — Percentage each tenancy class forms of marital class, by literacy status of heads,

for urban families, Canada, 1931 '. 151

Table 24 — Number and percentage illiterate of the married wage-earner heads of families living with wives, by various occupation groups, and showing average yearly earnings of heads, arranged in ascending order of percentage iUiterate, Canada, 1931 151

Table 25 — Number and percentage illiterate of the married wage-earner heads of families living with wives, by various occupation groups, and showing average yearly earnings of heads, Canada, by provinces, 1931 152

Table 26 — Percentages illiterate of the married and single 15 years of age and over, by

certain age groups, provinces and cities of 30,000 and over, 1931 154

Table 27 — Percentages illiterate of the married and single females 15-20 years of age,

Canada and provinces and cities of 30,000 and over, 1931 154

Table 28 — Number and percentage of the population 5-24 years of age, at school for any

period, by single years of age and sex, Canada, 1931 and 1921 155

Table 29 — School attendance of the population 5-19 years of age, Ijy months at school, rural

and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 and 1921 ' 156

Table 30 — School attendance of the population 5-19 years of age, bj' age groups and nativity,

Canada, 1931 and 1921 157

Table 31 — Average number of years spent "at school" and average number of years in actual attendance by the population 5-24 years of age, by certain age groups, Canada and provinces, 1911-1931 158

Table 32 — School attendance of the nopulation 5-24 years of age, by single years, of age,

sex and months at school, Canada, 1931 and 1921 159

Table 33 — Average school grade reached and distribution of improvement, between grades,

for all ages and for ages 13 and 14, certain provinces of Canada, 1931 and 1924 160

Table 34 — Percentages leaving school and estimated number of full years spent at school,

at each age over 10, Canada, by provinces, 1931 160

Table 35 — Population, number of persons attending school (all ages) and average number of months at school during the year in the rural parts of the counties or census divisions of Canada, 1931 , 161

Table 36 — Number and percentage of counties according to percentages at school for

Canadian-, British- and foreign-born population 7-14 j^ears of age, Canada, 1931. . . . 164

Table 37 — Percentages at school of the population 7-14 years of age, density of population per square mile, percentages of total population urban, rural non-farm and British races, GaJiada, by counties or census divisions, 1931 165

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 7

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Con.

PART III— Con.

Tables— Coil.

Page Table 38 — Own children 7-14 years of age not at school, by nativity and literacy of parent,

Canada and provinces, 1931 168

Table 39 — Percentages of own children 7-14 years of age not at school, by nativity and

literacy- of parent, Canada and provinces, 1931 169

Table 40 — Number and percentage of own children 7-14 years of age not at school, by

marital status of head of family and number of children, Canada, 1931 170

Table 41 — Number and percentage of own children 7-14 years of age not at school, by

literacy and marital status of head of family, Canada and provinces, 1931 170

Table 42 — Number and percentage of own children 7-14 years of age not at school, in

families with wage-earner heads, husband and wife hving together, by occupation

group, Canada. and provinces, 1931 172

Table 43 — Number of illiterate husbands and wives in families with wage-earner heads,

husband and wife living together, by occupation group, Canada and provinces, 1931 174 Table 44 — Number of o\vn children 7-14 years of age in families with wage-earner head,

husband and wife living together, with number and percentage not at school, number

of husbands and wives and number and percentage illiterate, by occupation group,

Canada, 1931 174

Table 45 — Median years spent at school, by quinquennial age groups and sex, rural and

urban, Prairie Provinces, 1936 176

Table 46 — Percentages at school for specified number of years, rural and urban, Prairie

Provinces, 1936 ". 176

Table 47— Years spent at school of the total population, by quinquennial age groups and

sex, averaged in quartiles, Prairie Provinces, 1936 177

Table 48 — Percentages of urban population at school for specified number of years, local- ities of 10,000 and over, Prairie Provinces, 1936 177

SYNOPSIS

Summary Page

Literacy and Illiteracy •" 17

Comparison with Other Countries 17

Improvement with the Passing Years 18

Social and Economic Concomitants 18

Literacy and Conjugal Condition 19

Present Status of School Attendance 20

Extent and Direction of Changes in School Attendance during the Century 21

Influence of Physical Environment and Population Content upon School Attendance 22

Influence of Home Environment upon School Attendance 22

Years Spent at School by the Population of the Prairie Provinces as Reported in the

Census of 1936 • 23

PART I

Illiteracy

Chapter I — Statements on Literacy and Illiteracy in Canada

Introduction 26

Distribution of Illiteracy 27

Segregation of Illiteracy 27

Geographical Distribution and Segregation 28

Age Segregation , "0

Racial Segregation 31

Rural Segregation 34

Measurement of the Major Influences Contributing to Ilhteracy in Canada 34

Male and Female 36

Rural and Urban 37

Older Ages and Ages 10-14 37

British Races and Other Races 37

Illiteracy by Provinces 38

Tabular Statements —

Statement I — Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age

and over, by quinquennial age groups, Canada, 1931 31

Statement II— Number and percentage ilUterate of the population 10 years of age

and over, by racial origin, in descending order of illiteracy rate, Canada, 1931 ... 31

Statement III— Number and percentage illiterate of the population 10 years of age

and over, by quinquennial age groups, Quebec, 1931 33

Statement IV — Illiteracy of other races compared with that of British races under 72 different conditions, assuming a sample of 100 persons being taken from each condition, Canada, 1931 35

Statement V — Ilhteracy of older ages compared with that of ages 10-14 under 72 different conditions, assuming a sample of 100 persons being taken from each condition, Canada, 1931 35

Statement VI— Illiteracy of rural compared with that of urban under 317 different conditions, assuming a sample of 100 persons being taken from each condition, Canada, 1931 36

Statement VII— Illiteracy of males compared with that of females under 318 differ- ent conditions, assuming a sample of 100 persons being taken from each condition, Canada, 1931 : 36

Statement VIII — Numerical and percentage comparison of ilhteracy of males 70-74 years of age (born before Confederation) and those 10-14 years of age, Canada and provinces, 1931 38

Statement IX — Illiteracy of the nine provinces standardized for racial, sex, rural and

urban and age distribution, Canada, 1931 39

Statement X — Illiteracy of the nine provinces standardized for sex, rural and urban

and age (quinquennial groups) distribution, Canada, 1931 • 40

Statement XI — Illiteracy of the nine provinces compared after correcting for handi- caps of sex, age, rural distribution and race, Canada, 1931 40

9

10 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART I— Con.

Chapter I— Statements on Literacy and Illiteracy in Canada — Con.

Charts— Page Chart 1 — Frequency of illiteracy rates in 222 counties and census divisions of Canada,

1931 : 29

Chart 2 — Geographical segregation of illiteracy for Canada (as a whole), 1931 29

Chart 3— Age segregation of illiteracy for Canada at stated ages (nine provinces), 1931 30

Chart 4 — Racial segregation of illiteracy for Canada (nine provinces), 1931 32

Chart 5 — Age segregation of illiteracy in the province of Quebec, 1931 33

Chart 6— The relative weights of sex, rural residence, age and race in illiteracy,

Canada, 1931 . 37

Map I— Distribution of the 309,396 illiterate population 10 years of age and over,

among the 222 counties or census divisions of Canada, 1931 28

Chapter II— Comparison of Illiteracy in Canada with That in Other Countries

Introduction 41

. Areas of Least Illiteracy 41

Pohtical Divisions with Population over Half Illiterate 43

Non-Tabular Summary of Latest Available Data on Illiteracy in Different Countries 45

Tabular Statements —

Statement XII — Percentages illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by

birthplace, arranged in ascending order of magnitude, Canada, 1931 42

Statement XIII — Comparison of percentages illiterate of various age groups in

Canadian population, 1931, with the illiteracy of different countries 44

otaternent XIV — Comparison of percentages illiterate of various age groups in Cana- dian population with percentages illiterate of persons from various countries living in Canada, 1931 44

Chapter III — Improvement in the Illiteracy Status of Canada with the Passing Years

Introduction 4g

Agencies at Work in Eliminating Illiteracy 48

Improvement among the Different Sections of the Population 50

Changes in Illiteracy between 1921 and 1931 52

Indications of Improvement or Retrogression after Passing School Age 52

Improvement in Illiteracy in the Different Provinces, 1921-1931 53

Improvement in 1921-1931 among Different Classes of the Population 54

Rural and Urban, Male and Female 54

Canadian, British and Foreign Born 54

Races 55

Population from Various Countries of Birth 55

Nativity of Parents and Illiteracy 56

Improvement by Geographical Areas 56

Comparison of Immigrants of Various Years of Arrival 57

Tabular Statements —

Statement XV — Percentages illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over and

percentage improvement in the decade, by broad age groups, Canada, 1931-1921 48 Statement XVI — Percentages illiterate of the population 10 years of age and over, by quinquennial age groups, and percentage improvement of each group over the immediately older group, with percentage immigrant in each group, Canada, 1931 49 Statement XVII — Percentage improvement in illiteracy over immediately older age

group, by quinquennial age groups, sex, rural and urban, Canada, 1931 50

Statement XVIII — Population with probable survivors and probable number and

percentage illiterate in 1941, by quinquennial age groups, Canada, 1931 52

Statement XIX — Estimated illiteracy rate, by sex, for the provinces of Canada, 1951,

if the percentage rate of improvement of 1921-1931 continued to obtain 54

Statement XX— Number and percentage of the rural male population 10 years of

age and over and percentages illiterate, by nativity, Canada, 1931 and 1921 55

Statement XXI — Percentages illiterate of the Canadian-born population 10 years of age and over living in the provinces compared with the same percentages born in the provinces, Canada, 1931 56

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 11

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART I— Con.

Chapter III— Improvement in the Illiteracy Status of Canada with the Passing Years — Con.

Tabular Statements— Con. Page

Statement XXII — Percentages illiterate of the rural population 10 years of age and over, Canada (exclusive of British Columbia), by counties or census divisions, 1931 and

1921 57

Statement XXIII — Number and percentage illiterate of the immigrant population 10

years of age and over, by nativity, year of immigration and sex, Canada, 1931 . . 58

Charts —

Chart 7 — Geographical segregation of illiteracy for rural Canada (exclusive of British

Columbia), 1931-1921 58

Chapter IV — Social and Economic Concomitants of Illiteracy

Introduction 60

Social Aspects of Illiterac}' 60

The Family Composition 60

Marital Condition of Illiterates 63

Size of Families 64

Educational Status of Children of Literate and Illiterate Families 66

Certain Economic Features of Illiteracy 67

Tenancy ^ 67

Employment and Earnings of Wives and Children of Literate and Illiterate Heads. . 68

Illiteracy and Occupational Status 70

Illiteracy and Institutional Cases 71

Mental Institutions 72

Penal Institutions 74

Tabular Statements —

Statement XXIV^Perccntages of families without dependents and family composition for (a) all families and (b) families with children or other dependents, by marital and literacy status of head, Canada, 1931 61

Statement XXV — Number of single female heads of families, number of own chil- dren and number per 10,000 single female heads, by nativity and literacy of head, i-ural and urban by size groups, Canada, 1931 62

Statement XXVI — Families, by marital and literaoj' status of head and number and

pei'ccntage illiterate, Canada, 1931 63

Statement XXVII — Percentages of total literate and illiterat(3 heads of families in

each marital class, Canada, 1931 64

Statement XXVIII — Persons living in families, families having no dependents and

■ average size of family and of family with dependents, Canada, 1931 65

Statement XXIX — Average size of family, by marital and literacy status of head,

Canada, 1931 65

Statement XXX — Percentages of children illiterate arranged in order of magnitude, by marital and literacy status and sex of head of family and age group of children, Canada, 1931 66

Statement XXXI — Number of families in each tenancy class, by marital and literacy

status of head, Canada, 1931 " • • • 67

Statement XXXII — Tenancv class as percentage of marital class, by literacy status

of head of family, Canada, 1931 68

Statement XXXIII — Wives and children earning and average yearly earnings, etc.,

in families with two married heads, by literacy of head, Canada, 1931 68

Statement XXXIV — Wives and children earning and average yearly earnings, etc.,

in urban families viith two married heads, by literacy of head, Canada, 1931 ... 69

Statement XXXV — Number of children, number of children earning and total and average earnings in urban families with one head only, by marital and literacy status of head, Canada, 1931 ." ' 69

Statement XXXVI — Summary of wives and children earning in urban families,

Canada, 1931 70

12 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART I— Con.

Chapter IV — Social and Economic Concomitants of Illiteracy — Con.

Tabular Statements — Con. Page

Statement XXXVII — Fifty occupation groups selected from the nine provinces as having fifty or more illiterates engaged in the occupation, by average yearly earnings and percentages iUiterate, arranged in decreasing order of average earnings, Canada, 1931 70

Statement XXXVIII — Percentages illiterate of inmates of mental institutions, by

age on admission and sex, Canada, 1931 72

Statement XXXIX — Percentages of inmates of mental institutions who are insane or feeble-minded and percentages iUiterate of the insane or feeble-minded, by age on admission and sex, Canada, June 1, 1931 . . .' 72

Statement XL — Percentages iUiterate of inmates of mental institutions, by psychosis,

Canada, June 1, 1931 73

Statement XLI — Percentages iUiterate of inmates of mental institutions, by psychosis

and percentages as multiples of that of the general population, Canada, 1931 . . 73

Statement XLII — Literacy of inmates (all over 15 years of age) of Dominion peni- tentiaries, by sex, Canada, June 1, 1931 74

Statement XLIII — Illiteracy of inmates of penitentiaries compared with that of the general population 15 years of age and over and Uliteracy of inmates as multiple of that of population, Canada, June 1, 1931 74

Statement XLIV — Percentages ilUterate of adult and juvenile inmates of corrective

institutions other than penitentiaries, by sex, Canada, June 1, 1931 74

Statement XLV — Average school grade attained by boy dehnquents and boys in

ordinary schools, by single years of age, Canada, 1931 75

Chapter V — Literacy and Conjugal Condition

Introduction 76

IlUteracy of the Married 77

Children in FamiUes 78

FertiUty 79

Intermarriage 79

Conclusion '. 8

Tabular Statements — •

Statement XLVI — ^Percentages illiterate of the population 15 years of age and over, by

conjugal condition, certain age groups and sex, with year of birth, Canada, 1931 . . 77 Statement XL VII — Females 15 years of age and over, married or widowed, as percent- age of number single, by broad age groups and literacy, with year of birth, Canada, 1931 7i

Statement XL VIII — Number of married mothers, total own children and children per mother, by Uteracy and conjugal condition of mother and literacy of head, Canada, 1931 79

Statement XLIX— Married males, by Uteracy and literacy of wives, Canada, 1931 . : 80

PART II School Attendance Chapter VI — Statement of the Present Status of School Attendance

Introduction 82

School Attendance in Canada, 1931 82

Ages at School ■ 83

Regularity of Attendance 84

Nativity and School Attendance 86

School Attendance by Provinces 87

Tabular Statements —

Statement L — Indices of percentages at school with age 11 as base and differences

between successive ages, Canada, 1931 and 1921 '. 84

Statement LI — Percentages in average daily attendance at school according to teachers' and census reports, with the difference between the two, Canada, by

provinces, 1931 85

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 13

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART II— Con.

Chapter VI — Statement of the Present Status of School Attendance— Con.

Tabular Statements— Con. Page

Statement LII— Percentages of the school population 5-19 years of age in average

daily attendance, rural and urban, Canada and provinces, 1931 86

Statement LIII — Average number of months at school and percentages attending school of the population 5-19 years of age, by nativity and age group, Canada, 1931 87

Statement LIV— Percentages of total population 5-19 years of age, percentages 5-19 years of age at school and percentages of the total population at school, Canada and provinces, 1931 87

Statement LV — Estimated number of years spent "at school" and in actual attendance by the popidation 5-24 years of age, with the difference between the two, Canada and provinces, 1931 88

Statement LVI — Number and percentages in Grades VIII-XII (exclusive of the Roman

Catholic schools of Quebec), Canada, 1927, 1931 and 1933 '. 89

Chapter VII — Extent and Direction of Changes in School Attendance During

the Century

Introduction • • "0

Age at Which School Life Should Begin 90

Value of Time Spent at School under Age 7 91

Evaluation of Changes in School Attendance 91

Provincial Distribution of Improvement ' 93

Standing Attained at School 94

School Attendance and Sex 95

Older School Children 99

Tabular Statements —

Statement LVII — Percentages of the population 5-24 years of age at school and average

number of months spent at school in year, by single years of age, Canada,

1931 91

Statement LVIII — Average number of years "at school" and in actual attendance,

with the difference between the two, by age groups, Canada, 1911-1931 91

Statement LIX — Estimated length of school life and time spent in actual attendance,

with the difference between the two and increase in each during the period,

Canada and provinces, 1931 and 1911 93

Statement LX — Average length of school hfe at ages 7-14 and increases during the

period, Canada and provinces, 1931 and 1911 94

Statement LXI — Average grade at the age of 14 and average number of years spent

in school by the age of' 14, seven provinces of Canada, 1931 95

Statement LXII — Percentages of population 5-24 years of age attending school, by

single years of age and sex, and increase in the decade, Canada, 1931-1921 95

Statement LXIII — Estimated length in years of the school life of the population 5-24

years of age, by age group and sex, and increase in the decade, Canada, 1931-1921 . 97 Statement LXIV — Average number of months spent at school by the' population 5-24

years of age, increase in the decade and percentage of population at school, by

single years of age and sex, Canada, 1931-1921 97

Statement LXV — Estimated number of years (nine-month) spent at school by the

population 5-24 years of age, by age group and sex, and increase in the decade,

Canada, 1931-1921 98

Statement LXVI — Estimated time in years spent in actual attendance at school, by

single years of age and sex, Canada, 1931 and 1921 98

Statement LXVII — Grade standing of persons attending school over age of 16,

Canada, 1931 100

Statement LXVIII— Grade standing of persons attending school at age of 15, Canada, ■

1931 100

Charts —

Chart 8 — Percentages at each grade (1-12) of children 14 years of age, seven provinces

of Canada, 1931 and 1924 98

14 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART II— Con.

Chapter VIII — Influence of Physical Environment and Population Content upon School Attendance

Page

Introduction J02

Physical Environment 102

EiTects on Regularity of Attendance 102

Effects on Proportions Attending School 104

Population Content — Effects on School Attendance and Relation to Physical Environ- ment 104

Correlation of Percentages at School with Various Factors 106

Conclusion ; 107

Tabular Statements —

Statement LXIX — Percentages of total ages compared with percentages of total

counties represented in various intervals of school attendance, Canada, 1931 103

Statement LXX — Percentages of the population at school at certain ages, Canada and

provinces, 1931 ; , _ 104

Statement LXXI— Scatter diagram showing frequency distribution of 220 counties according to percentages attending school of Canadian born, in relation to per- centages attending school of foreign born.Canada, 1931 105

Map II — Distribution of rural school attendance according to the number of months at school of those attending, among the 222 counties or census divisions of Canada, 1930-1931 102

Map UI — Distribution of the Canadian-born population 7-14 years of age, according to percentages attending school for any period, among' the 222 counties or census divisions of Canada, 1930-1931 104

Chapter IX — Influence of Home Environment upon School Attendance

Introduction 108

Distribution of Children 7-14 108

Own and Guardianship Children 109

Marital Status and Size of Family HI

Illiteracy of Parents 112

Nativity Class of Parents 112

Summary of Influence of Illiterate and of One Parent 114

Children of Two Literate Parents Living Together 115

Occupational Distribution of Family Heads 115

Tabular Statements — •

Statement LXXII — Distribution of children 7-14 years of age in families, by type of

family and class of children, Canada, 1931 108

Statement LXXIII— Distribution of children 7-14 years of age not at school, by type

of family and class of children, Canada, 1931 108

Statement LXXIV — Children 7-14 years of age not at school, living with and apart

from parents, Canada and provinces, 1931 109

Statement LXXV — Number and percentage of children 7-14 years of age, in families,

not at school, by class of children, Canada, 1931 109

Statement LXXVI — Children 7-14 years of age, in families, not at school, by class of

children and Hteracy of parent or guardian, Canada, 1931 110

Statement LXXVII — Number and percentage of children 7-14 years of age, in families,

not at school, by class of children and literacy of parent or guardian, Canada, 1931 , 1 10 Statement LXXVTII — Number and percentage of guardianship children 7-14 years of

age not at school, by literacy of guardian, Canada and provinces, 1931 110

Statement LXXIX — Actual and corrected percentages of own children 7-14 years

of age not at school and index of figures corrected for size of family, by class

of head, Canada, 1931 HI

Statement LXXX — Number and percentage of own children 7-14 years" of age not

at school, by number and literacy of parents, Canada, 1931 112

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 15

SYNOPSIS— Con.

PART II— Con.

Chapter IX — The Influence of Home Environnement upon School Attendance — Con.

Tabular Statements — Con. Page

Statement LXXXI — Percentages of own children 7-14 years of age not at school, bj'

literacy, number and nativity of parents, Canada, 1931 113

Statement LXXXII— Differences in percentages not at school between children 7-14 years of age of literate and illiterate Canadian-born parents, and the differences as multiples of percentages not at school with literate parents, Canada and prov- inces, 1931 113

Statement LXXXIII — Estimated number and percentage of own children 7-14 years of age, in families with one head only, not at school due to separated parents, by literacy and nativity of head, Canada and provinces, 1931 114

Statement LXXXIV— Estimated number of children 7-14 years of age not at school due to illiteracy of parent or guardian, by kind and nativity of head, Canada and provinces, 1931 115

Statement LXXXV — Percentages of children 7-14 years of age not at school, in families with male wage-earner head living with wife, by occupation group of head, Canada, 1931 116

Statement LXXXVI — Percentages of children 7-14 years of age not at school, in families with wage-earner head living with wife, compared with percentages of parents illiterate, by occupation group of head," Canada, 1931 116

Chapter X — Years Spent at School by the Population of the Prairie Provinces as Reported in the Census of 1936

Introduction 118

Median Years Spent at School ' 119

Improvement 119

Dispersion of Years Spent at School - 121

The High School and Post-High School Periods ■ 123

Tabular Statements —

Statement LXXXVII — Comparison of median years spent at school by the age groups

20-24 and 30-34 (representing periods of maximum attendance in census years

1926 and 1916 respectively), by sex, rural and urban, Prairie Provinces, 1936. . . 120

Statement LXXXVIII — Comparison of years spent at school by the age group 20-24

with average of groups 10-14 and 15-19, by sex, rural and urban, Prairie Provinces,

1936 , 121

Statement LXXXIX — Comparison of percentages never attending school, for age

groups 10-14 and 15-19, rural and urban, Prairie Provinces, 1936 122^

Statement XC — Comparison of percentages attending school less than five years, for

certain age groups, rural and urban, Prairie Provinces, 1936 123

Statement XCI — Comparison of percentages attending school nine years or more , for

age groups 20-24 and 30-34, rural and urban, Prairie Provinces, 1936 123

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

KEY TO INDEX MAP

Province	County	Number on map	Province	County	Number on map	Province	County	Number on map
Prince Edward Island	Kings	1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13	Quebec-Con.	Chateauguay.... Chicoutimi Compton Deux-Montagnes Dorchester Drummond Frontenac	14 16 16 17 ■ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69	Ontario	Addington	I
		2
		Brant	3
	Annapolis Antigonish Cape Breton.... Colchester Cumberland Oigby	Bruce	4
Nova Scotia.;.	Carleton Cochrane Dufferin	5 6 7 8
	Hochelaga Hull	Durham Elgin	9 10
	Huntingdon Iberville	Essex	11
	Guysborough.. . Halifax	Frontenac Glengarry Grenville Grey	12 13
	Hants..	Kamouraska Labelle	14
	Inverness	16
	Lac-St-Jean Laprairie L'Assomption. . .	Haldimand Haliburton Halton	16
	Lunenburg	17 18
		Hastings	19
	Richmond Shelburne Victoria Yarmouth Albert		20
	L'IsIet		21
	Lotbini^re Maskinong^		22
	Lambton	23 24
	Mdgantic Missisquoi Montcalm Montmagny Montmorency... Montreal Island. Jesus Island Napiervilie	Leeds .	25
New Brunswick		• 26
	Carleton Charlotte Gloucester Kent.		27
	Manitoulin Middlesex Muskoka Nipissing Norfolk.	28 29 30
	Kings	31 32
	Madawaaka Northumber- land
	Northumber-
	Papineau	33
	Queens		34
	Restigouche St. John Sunbury Victoria Westmorland. . . York	Portneuf Quebec	Oxford	36
	Parry Sound Peel	36
	Richelieu Richmorid Rimouski Rouville Saguenay Shefford..'. Sherbrooke Soulanges Stanstead St-Hyacinthe. . . St Jean	37
	Perth	38
	Peterborough... Prescott Prince Edward. Rainy River Renfrew Russell .	39
	Abitibi Argenteuil Arthabaska Bagot	41 42 43 44
		46
	Stormont Sudbury Thunder Bay... Timiskaming... Victoria Waterloo Welland Wellington Wentworth York	46 47
	Beauce
	Beauharnois Bellechasse Berthier Bona venture Brome	St-Maurice T^miseouata Temiskaming. . . Terrebonne Vaudreuil Verchdres Wolte .. .	43 49 60 61 62
	Chambly Champlain Charlevoix	63 64
	Yamaska	65
	District of Patricia	56

Note. — The census division numbers of the Prairie Provinces and British Columbia are given on the map.

SUMMARY

Illiteracy— or more correctly, literacy — and school attendance are closely allied subjects- In a country amply supplied with schools and with school attendance compulsory in eight of the nine provinces, persona unable to read and write and persons not attending school between certain ages are something of a phenomenon.

The present monograph is concerned with the numberp and distribution throughout Canada of these persons, the underljdng causes and the social and economic concomitants.

LITERACY AND ILLITERACY

The census ascertained how many in the population "can read and write" — the numbers literate though not the degree of literacy. The negative term illiieracy is here regarded as the more significant aspect of the situation.

In 1931, there were in Canada 309,396 persons 10 years of age and over who could neither read nor write; this is 3-79 p.c. of the population of that age.

Ages 10 and over were alone considered, as some portion of the population below that age might have had no opportunity to learn to read and write.

Figxu'es of illiteracy, however, must be taken with a great many reservations. Bald compari- sons, especially as between provinces, should be avoided. On the whole iUiteracy is widespread (geographically) over Canada and, while the percentage is not high as compared with some countries, this diffusion is apt to militate against its immediate elimination. From this it follows that segregation of illiteracy is the best condition for its ehmination. Attention may be drawn to two forms of segregation which will inevitably jdeld to time without increased effort on the part of the school system. These are age, for obvious reasons, and race, for the reason that its chief component, foreign birth, is giving way rapidly to Canadian birth. At present, race with its implication of foreign birth, hloc settlement and in-marriage, is the chief factor determining the illiteracy of Canada. After race comes age and after age, rural residence, especially residence in outlying parts. Another factor, but so small that it is practically negligible, is sex, i.e., males tend to be more illiterate than females, but to a very slight degree. Since, however, this degree obtains among the Canadian bom and not among the immigrant, it cannot be wholly ignored. It must be borne in mind that there is probably no such possibility as the complete elimination of illiteracy. Even under the best conditions in Canada there is some illiteracy and the same holds true of any country or race. The causes behind this irreducible minimum are obviously so ntmi- erous that they may be regarded as almost individual.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

A comparison of the ilhteracy rates of Canada with those of other countries is not only difficult but well nigh impossible owing to the difference in methods used in measuring illiteracy in the various countries and the lack of recent data for many of these countries. One means, however, is by comparing the ilhteracy of the immigrant population in Canada according to their various birthplaces — but this does not take into consideration whether or not a country is sending out its more iUiterate population and retaining its more fiterate. When we consider that certain countries such as Germany and the Scandinavian countries claim to have no iUiteracy and yet we find in Canada ilUterate immigrants from these countries, we are led to the conclusion that the illiteracy data of these countries is not collected on the same basis as our own or else that they are export- ing their iUiterates.

Generally speaking the areas of least illiteracy were found to be in North Western Europe, the areas of greatest illiteracy — those having 50 p.c. or more — in or near the Torrid Zone. But even this broad statement leaves something to be desired in fairness, for it takes no account of the various forms of segregation of iUiteracy which may exist within these geographical areas.

Comparing the iUiteracy of the inmiigrants in Canada from forty-five different birthplaces. South Africa showed the least illiteracy — only 0 • 14 p.c. — but South Africa had less than 6,000 repre- sentatives in Canada over 10 years of age, which renders the comparison again somewhat unjust. The British Isles and Possessions and the United States came next, closely, followed by the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland and HoUand. South America, France and "other" British foUowed — all of which had less than Canada's rate of 3 • 79 p.c. Greater than the Canadian rate

17

47652-2

18 ~ CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

were Germany, Belgium, Newfoundland, Spain, "other" Europe, "other" countries, India, Finland, Greece, etc. — all with less than 10 p.c. — and so on down to Armenia and the Ukraine with 21 p.c.

Comparing the illiteracy of certain countries with that of the various age groups in- Canada it was found that the United Kingdom, North Western Europe, Japan (except Cho Sen province), AustraUa, New Zealand and Northern Ireland had about the same rates as that of Canada's lowest group — the 10-19-year-olds. The United States had about the same as Canada's 35-39- year group; France and Czechoslovakia the same as our 55-59-year group; Hungary the same as our 60-64-year group; the Irish Free State comparable to the Canadian 65-69, and the Argentine Republic, Alaska, Newfoundland and Labrador and probably Poland the same as our 95-99-year group. In addition to these are the countries more than half iUiterate which are higher than any Canadian age group, the U.S.S.R., Portugal, a number of South and Central American countries, Ceylon, India, Egypt, non-Europeans of the Union of South Africa, the Philippines, etc., etc.

IMPROVEMENT WITH THE PASSING YEARS

The schools of Canada on their part are ehminating illiteracy at a rate which gives rise to a statistical phenomenon, viz., increasing (instead of diminishing) returns. This is proved by the fact that the 10-14-year-olds are not only the least "illiterate of the age groups but that their improvement over the immediately older group is greater than of that group over the next older, the same being true of the 15-19-year-olds. This proves that the schools and school attendance agencies are highly efficient. On the other hand this is counteracted by the injection into the piopulation of more illiterate classes at older ages. So long as this continues, illiteracy cannot be eliminated and it cannot be segregated geographically in order to confine the illiterates to a few areas and attack them en masse by some kind of drive. As it is, percentages as high as the average or higher are widespread geographically. This idea sumniarizes the situation from the point of view of improvement. Illiteracy has been decreasing at an undiminishing rate since the date at which the oldest persons now living in Canada were of school age, this rate being accelerated during the last fifteen years. Between 1921 and 1931 there was marked improvement in all classes of the population- and, also, the high percentages of illiteracy were confined to fewer areas. The situation at present is, however, that iUiterate persons among the early adult ages are more common than is natural considering the rate of improvement in the population as a whole. These particular ages are the ages of the parents of children who are now of school age. It follows that this adds to the problems of school attendance administration that of overcoming the inertia or unwillingness of these parents. The children of illiterate parents showed poorer school attendance during the year 1930-31 than did those of literate parents. This makes the reaUty of the problem obvious.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONCOMITANTS

The findings of this study are so important and so striking that they call for a definition of iUiteracy quite different from that popularly conceived. Usually we under- stand by iUiteracy merely inability to read or write. If the person is iUiterate he is re- garded as losing certain social privileges by his status, arising directly from his disability — nothing more. Illiteracy as a social problem is considered commensurate with what the indi- vidual loses by this disability and what the country loses through his lack of intelUgent grasp of the duties of the citizen because ignorant of letters. If we accept this definition, it becomes at once apparent that both premises and conclusions are open to argument. There are many familiar cases where an illiterate person is more inteUigent and more efficient than his literate neighbours. He cannot read, but he has a sort of traditional Uteracy and native inteUigence by which he can not only handle his business efficiently but also keep in touch with world affairs. This is especiaUy true in these days of radios and taUiing pictures. The situation revealed by this survey contests this definition in all but minor points. The illiterate person, no doubt, loses, and the country of which he is a citizen also loses to an extent, by the fact that he is UUterate, but tliis is not the most serious side of the situation. In the definition which seems to be more adequate it is not individual iUiteracy that is important, but class iUiteracy. What is aU-important is the reason why the class is Uliterate, not the )act. A test of this can easily be made. Suppose by special effort a class of persons which now shows 15 p.c. iUiterate, could be made to show only 1 p.c.; would this raise the class from inefficiency to efficiency? The answer in aU probability is "no".

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 19

except to an insignificant degree. The story told in tliis monograph is that the illiterate class is below par in every attribute for which they were tested except one — tendency to crime — and also that they show certain attributes which may or may not be anti-social but in any case are different from those shown by literate classes. One of these is the tendency to have larger families. The possibility, and even the probability, that this is anti-social arises from the fact that at the same time their earnings are much lower than those of the hterate classes, i.e., they are willing to assume responsibiUties which they are poorly equipped or unable to meat. The illiterate class is seen to show the following characteristics in a marked degree different from the literate:

(1) a slight tendency to different marital status;

(2) a tendency to have larger famiUes including not only "own" children but other children;

(3) to have fewer dependents other than children;

(4) to have a greater proportion of their children ilUterate arising principally out of poorer school attendance;

(5) to have a larger proportion of their wives and children working;

(6) to show much lower earnings per wife and child earning;

(7) to have the heads of family belonging to an occupation class receiving the lowest wages;

(8) to show more illegitimacy;

(9) to show definitely a greater proportion of inmates in mental institutions;

(10) to show, though very shghtly, a greater proportion, especially of females, in corrective institutions;

(11) in striking contradistinction to the foregoing, to show smaller proportions of persons convicted of indictable offences.

With the conception of illiteracy as the brand of a class, it is easy to see why forcibly raising that class from a state of illiteracy to literacy might even be harmful, as in other cases where the symptom is removed and not the cause. If the class itself voluntarily accomplishes this task, well and good, but it is doubtful that it should be undertaken as a special mission by the literate classes. What is all important is to remove the cause or causes back of the symptoms.

If, then, illiteracy so clearly distinguishes a class for which statistical information would otherwise be very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, it follows that it is highly important to collect information on illiteracy at the census. Such countries as have ceased to obtain this information are probably losing a great deal. It is of little or no use to obtain some figures by means of army conscripts, etc., for this is attacking the matter at the wrong end — selecting the class first and then measuring its illiteracy, instead of giving the information on illiteracy the opportunity of designating the class.

LITERACY AND CONJUGAL CONDITION

In its relation to conjugal condition, illiteracy is very important. We have already measured or indicated relatively how much illiteracy is due to race, age, rural residence, sex and other factors. Now let us see how much is due to class and how much is accident or opportunity.

In 1931, 5-18 p.c. of the married and "at one time married" population 15 years of age and over were illiterate as compared with 2-44 p.c. of the single. The ready explanation is that the married people are older and thus possibly have had less opportunity for attending school. This explanation may be dismissed, since a comparison of age groups shows that the difference between married and single is greatest at the early ages, i.e., in the most recent marriages. Another explanation is that the illiteracy is regional, but a study of illiteracy figures for all the provinces and urban centres shows that illiteracy prevails in all sections to much the same extent.

On comparing the rates of marriage of the literate and illiterate females, a steady increase in the hitter's tendency to marry is seen. From practically no difference, the tendency has been increasing until now the illiterates are 3 -3 times as likely to marry as the literates. Viewed from a social standpoint this creates an alarming situation.

The fivmily statistics reveal that, of own children living at home, there are 2 ■ 55 per illiterate mother as compared with 2-23 per hterate mother or 1-14 times as many. The comparative fertility of the illiterate to the literate females would seem to be 1-49 to 1-00. Applying the same birth, death, fertility and marriage ratesasatpresent, in fifteen years the ratio of literate to ~ illiterate females will be only 6 to 1 as compared with 29 to 1 at present. Thus if these tendencies remain the same and the birth rate to literate mothers continues its apparent decrease, we see that the illiteracy problem is not only a real but a growing one. 47652-2i

20 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

There is one other striking feature of iUiterao}' as regards conjugal condition and that is the tendency to intermarriage among iUiterates. Illiterate females in 1931 made a choice of illit- erate to literate husbands in the ratio of 24-3 to 1 and illiterate males chose illiterate wives in the ratio of 19-8 to 1. In other words, there was an intermarriage between illiterates of 48-9 p.c, which is highly significant when we consider the higher and younger marriage rates and greater fertility.

Now we see that the ilUterate portion of the population is becoming more and more segregated by (1) intermarriage, (2) marrying younger and having more offspring and (3) keeping these offspring out of school. However, this segregation is in itself a check, in that they have to choose their mates from 6 p.c. of the population if they wish to intermarry as is their tendency.

PRESENT STATUS OF SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

Besides its obvious bearing on illiteracy there are many other aspects of school attendance. In the last' decade there was an increase of almost 26 p.c. in those attending school as compared with 18 p.c. in the total population. This was due to greater school-mindedness of the population, greater proportions of the population being at school age, lack of work in the last year of the decade for those at older ages who would ordinarily have left school and the raising of compulsory attendance ages throughout the provinces.

Now, more than ever, the years spent at school form a very important part of a lifetime. At the ages of 16-19, school attendance has increased 86 p.c. The average number of years spent at school is 9-9, which is an increase of 1-93 years since 1911. This would seem to indi- cate that life is growing either progressively fuller or more difficult. Of course, the reason for this lengthening-out is not that every individual remained at school much longer; rather it is due to the fact that some persons remained at school no longer than before but that more persons stayed a long time at school and fewer persons stayed only a year. Males have an average of 39 years gainful employment and females an average of 8 years. Since the sexes attend school in approximately equal numbers and for the same period, 19-8 years are spent at school for every 47 years of gainful employment. If these years at school are wasted by irregular attendance the loss is readily discernible.

Experience seems to show that there is no great gain in sending children to school too young. The proportions at school increase from the age of 6 up to the age of 11, after which they decrease, at first slowly and then rapidly from the age of 13 on, that at 11 being 97-18 p.c. In 1931 both the approach to and recession from the high point (the ages of 10 and 11) were less rapid than in 1921. In 1931 the effect of the Compulsory Attendance Acts is very noticeable as they begin to drop out rapidly at the age of 15, which is not a particular stage in school life.

Census returns show that 94-62 p.c. of all the pupils going to school attended 7-9 months out of a possible 9 months (September to May); 3-19 p.c. attended 4-6 months and 2-19 p.c. attended less than 4 months. The average number was about 7 - 8 months out of 9, or, say, 87 p.c. of the possible time. Teachers' returns on the same matter show sUght variations from census returns, the teachers' returns being in all cases the lower. The teachers' records do not include private schools, etc., but are day-by-day records so that a month in which a day or so has been missed is not counted as a full month as it is by a person answering from memory the questions put by the enumerator. The teachers' reports include also a floating population not seen in the census returns.

Data on the average daily attendance of urban and rural pupils show that although rural pupils find it harder to get to school than do urban pupils (8 p.c. difference), when they do go they attend almost as regularly (2-8 p.c. difference). Because these figures are for persons 5-19 years of age, the chief reason for the non-appearance at school of rural persons is likely to be the earlier dropping out of school. Using these data on months at school in conjunction with the ages of the pupils it is found that in 1931, out of 9-89 years tied down to the school, 1-34 years were wasted through irregularity in attendance. In this there is very little variation in 1931 from conditions in 1921 and 1911.

Data on the school attendance of the Canadian, British and foreign born show that the Cana- dian born stay longer at school while the British born begin school younger. The British born attend school more regularly than do either of the other two classes. The net result is that the British born put in as much time at school throughout their shorter school career as do the Cana-

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 21

dian born. The foreign born attend about 4 months less than the other two classes. If it is presumed 'that the British and Canadian born attain the same standing it may be concluded that the time spent "tied down to the school" over and above the time actually attended is waste.

When considering school attendance in the nine provinces it is seen that the relationship between the percentage at school age and the number attending school tends if anything to be an inverse one. Therefore, a large proportion of children at school age does not necessarily mean a correspondingly large proportion at school.

Of the time "at" school, the time lost is nearly uniform for the provinces. Quebec is the only marked exception, being so low that it pulls the Dominion average below those of all other provinces. In Quebec school life is also the shortest. This is because of the resemblances of the Quebec Roman CathoUo system to European systems. Indeed in all Canada education seems to be approaching this system, as in the last six years pupils have shown an increased tendency to drop out at Grade X, high school work or Ontario second year "Lower School", i.e., at the end of what is considered in Quebec to be "complementary" education.

EXTENT AND DIRECTION OF CHANGES IN SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DURING

THE CENTURY

Improvement in school attendance during the decade 1921-31 may be noted in two direc- tions— prolonged school life and increased time actually spent in school. Since 1911 school life has lengthened for all ages from 7 • 96 to 9 • 89 or by 1 • 93 years. The extension in the years at school under 7 is very slight (-06 years) as these are more and more recognized as pre-school years; between 7 and 14 is the largest increase (1-06 years), while from 15 to 17 we note 0-60 years and from 18 to 24, 0-21 years increase.

The time actually spent in school has increased from 6 ■ 58 years in 1911 to 8 • 55 years in 1931, a gain of 1 ■ 97 years. The difference in the years of school life and the actual years spent in school is 1 • 34 and must be regarded' as waste. The gain in actual schooling brought about by increased length of school life is an improvement where the gain takes place within the limits of school life (decrease of waste), while at the end, as is the case in most provinces, it is pure cost. The most economical and highest actual gain was in Alberta.

The changes in average school standing are similar to those that took place in school attend- ance. In the seven years 1924-31, the average pupil gained from 0-16 grades in Ontario to 0-62 grades in Saskatchewan and the average pupil of 14 is now in the high school entrance grade. While in most provinces the average school standing is directly proportional to the number of years schooling, the more rural provinces show a slightly more rapid advance.

Examining the school attendance figures by sex, we find interesting differences. The figures show about the same proportion at school up to the age of 14, a smaller proportion of boys from 15-18 and a larger proportion after that age. The most striking change for both sexes in the decade 1921-31, increased attendance at ages 15 and 16, may be attributed partly to Compulsory Attendance Acts.

Regularity of attendance added 0-42 and 0-38 years in the case of boys and girls respectively and the lengthening of school life was by 0-85 and 0-81 years. On the whole, the change that took place in the decade was lengthening the period of school attendance rather than making fuller use of it.

Considering more particularly the population 16 years of age and over, we observe that in the decade the time at school up to this age increased 0-66 years (average grade 8-50). This may bo regarded as equivalent to one grade. An average of 1 year is put in at school after 16 and, for the 45-98 p.o. of the population attending school after their sixteenth birthday, the average gain in standing is 2-27 years (average grade 10-77). Distributed over the whole populatioa this gain is 1-04 years.

The elementary school seems to supply the needs of the average person for as long as he attends school; the high school and institutions of higher learning are necessary for the intellectu- ally above average. It is the latter group that raises the educational level of the population to meet the intellectual needs of the country which an elementary education is unable to satisfy. .

The education the average person receives could be obtained with full attendance between the ages 7 and 14. In 1931, considering persons over the age of 16 at school, 6-97 p.c. were in Grade VIII, 5-43 p.c. below and 87-60 p.c. above that grade.

22 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

INFLUENCE OF PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND POPULATION CONTENT UPON

SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

Physical and social environment, regardless of compulsory attendance and other laws, directly influence school attendance. From the physical environment comes a twofold influence, (1) on the proportion of the population attending school and (2) on their regularity of attendance. If we take the 222 census divisions of Canada in 1931 we see a surprising uniformity in the regu- larity of attendance. Taking 9 months as the fuU school year, there are only 6 weeks between the poorest and the best. On the whole, only a slight geographical or cUmatic influence is shown. It is only under extreme conditions that influence of physical environment, once the pupil is registered at school, is appreciable.

There is, however, a remarkable variation in the proportion of the population attending school. Taking the percentages of the population at school at the ages of 7, 11 and 14, by prov- inces, there is a variation at 7 of 7-05, at 11 of 2-71, but at the age' of 14, a range of 26-27 p.c. Thus the variations are due more to a dropping out of school before the age of 14 than to differ- ences at other ages. A comparison of the percentages at school in different counties by nativity shows that the greatest uniformity is in Canadian born and the greatest variation in foreign born. There is httle reason to beheve that the same physical environment would permit one set of people to go to school and prevent another set from going to school. Thus the effects of physical environment, while present, are very small and are noticeable only in extreme climate and new, unsettled or mountainous parts.

To make more certain of the possible effects of physical environment, the percentage attending school is correlated with the density of population, percentage urban, percentage rural non-farm population and percentage British races. The density and percentage urban are regarded as physical factors, the other two as population content. In a sample of fifty-five counties, omitting the counties which were all urban or in outlying sections, the multiple correlation of percentage at school with the four factors mentioned above was 0-75. The correlation lay almost entirely with percentage British races. That with density of population was nil and the rural non-farm population showed a negative correlation.

The conclusion from this seems to be that only in extreme cases do physical conditions affect the percentages attending school. Therefore, the non-attendance around the age of 14 is purely a social phenomenon and will be explained as such presently.

INFLUENCE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT UPON SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

In the foregoing the effects of physical and social conditions have been seen, so now let us trace the relationship between the children not at school and their home conditions. In the 1931 Census special information was collected and classified concerning the parents and guardians in relation to their children and now the influence of home conditions may be easily shown for those not attending school.

In 1931 the number of children not at school between the ages of 7 and 14 was 121,279 out of a total population at these ages of 1,755,348, or 6 • 91 p.c. Of these there are 96,209 children bom to the family and 3,203 guardianship children or a total of 99,412 children found in families. From a study of the attendance of the own children and the guardianship children, guardianship is seen to be inimical to school attendance. Again, the larger families show more non-attendance than the smaller. However, the types of families when corrected for size of family show the best state for school attendance to be where both parents are present. We find from careful meas- urement that there are, of the children found in families, 2,373 out of school owing to lack of one or both parents and 14,079 out of school because of illiteracy of parents. Almost one-third of the total children not at school (38,749) may be said to be kept out by the lack of, illiteracy or marital status of parents, regardless of compulsory attendance laws and public opinion. This leaves 82,530 children who are not at school but whose non-attendance cannot be associated with the illit- eracy or marital status of the parents. Most of these absences occur at the ages of 7 or 14. A study of the children not at school, by occupational status of parents, shows that the attendance among wage-earners is better than among non-wage-earners. There are strong indications that the occupation of the parent has an influence upon the attendance of the children. Occupations which call for frequent moving about show greater non-attendance, which is only to be expected.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 " 23

Thus the three most important features of home environment influencing school attendance are (1) the illiteracy of the parents, (2) marital status of the parents and (3) occupation of the parents. Of these the illiteracy of the parents undoubtedly has the greatest influence on the non-attendance of the children.

YEARS SPENT AT SCHOOL BY THE POPULATION OF THE PRAIRIE PROVINCES AS REPORTED IN THE CENSUS OF 1936

In the 1936 Census of the Prairie Provinces something of an innovation was introduced into the schedules to obtain direct evidence upon the school attendance of the population as a whole. The question asked "Number of years spent at school?" referring to the num- ber of years attached to the school does not take into account the regularity of attendance or the intelligence of the persons. However, the number of years spent at school is a certain measure of attainment when applied to the population as a whole. Taking the three provinces by quinquennial age groups, males' and females, we see that the age group having the highest median years attendance is 20-24. For this group, over half the population had spent more than 8-2 years at school for the lowest and 9-8 for the highest. The difference is chiefly in the sexes, the females showing from 0-7 to 1-0 years more than the males. Thus we see that in all the provinces 50 p.c. of the persons had attended sufficiently long to attain high school entrance, while in Alberta with 9-8 years the females had attended sufficiently long to cover two years of high school.

By comparing the age groups in ten-year intervals, we can trace the improvements in attend- ance, remembering that those at 20-24 were at ages of maximum attendance in 1926 and those at 30-34 were at ages of maximum attendance in 1916. The lengthening out of school life is seen to vary from half a year in rural IManitoba to a year and a half in urban Saskatchewan. A length- ening out of 1 year in the period is a fair average of the situation as a whole. This compares with the figures already reached by inference in Chapter VI. Since the improvement seems to be greatest in recent years, the lengthening out of school life is at present about 2 years. These -2 years are due to attendance after the ages of compulsory attendance.

So far we have considered averages as measured by the median; now let us consider the ■ actual number of years at school by age groups. In the first place those who have never entered school may be said to comprise the illiterate portion of the population. At the ages 15-19 as many as 156 per 10,000 were never at school by the year 1936. The figures for "0" years at school are quite comparable with the illiteracy figures and show the same steady increase from younger to older persons. For those who attended less than 5 years but who actually went to school the 15-19 group shows the lowest percentage. This class may be termed literate but in a state where they might easily lapse into illiteracy or semd-iUiteracy. When we come to the proportion attend- ing school sufficiently long to have done high school work or more we find the greatest progress in the immediately preceding decade. The rural population shows that one-third have attended long enough to have some high school education while the urban could have two-thirds so edu- cated. This means that secondary education is no longer confined to a select population. Taking the 60-year-olds we see that less than 23 p.c. of the rural population attended school 9 years or more while of the 80-year-olds only 15 p.c. attended this long. Just how much of the lengthening out of school life among the younger population is due to the depression is hard to measure, but from an educational point of view we are living in a new world.

PART I ILLITERACY

CHAPTER I

STATEMENTS ON LITERACY AND ILLITERACY IN CANADA

Introduction. — The term illiteracy is usually employed in statements of the educational status of a country, i.e., the negative term is used instead of the positive. It may be useful to point out that this practice leads to concepts that are far from adequate. As will be developed later, illiteracy is not merely the negative of literacy. In this sense, its measure is less important than it is as a symptom of the presence of a number of anti-social forces, of physical or geo- graphical obstacles, of historical events such as dates of settlement, of the racial or nativity composition of the population, of the age distribution (the connection of which with illiteracy in turn is historical) and so on. As a mere picture of the actual educational status it is not nearly as interesting as the positive term, lileraaj. The literacy of the people is, of course, very difficult to describe. However, the census data furnish one simple concept, the number who can read or who think that they can read. In 1931 this number was 8,634,694 in a population of 10,377,000. In 1921 it was 7,015,666 in a population of 8,788,000. The population increased 1,589,000 or about 18 p.c; the persons able to read increased 1,619,000 or about 23 p.c. Of the population 10 years of age and over 95 out of 100 in 1921 and 96 in 1931 could read. In 1891 only about 85 out of 100 over the age of 10 could read.

An idea of what literacy as reported in the census means is given by the fact that the portion of the population which showed the greatest percentage able to read in 1931 was that between the ages of 10 and 14, where nearly 99 per 100 could read. This fact indicates that the standard of literacy thus measured is not very high. "Able to read" in the census means merely that the person has come within the influence of education. This crossing of a barrier, however, is something.

The literacy attainments of the 96 p.c. who can read are not traceable from census data except very indirectly and indistinctly. However, from school attendance (census) figures by ages and months at school, it is possible to estimate fairly closely how long the person stays at school, and frohn data on ages and grades, obtained directly from teachers, it is possible to esti- mate the correlation between time at school and grade attained on leaving school. From such data it is estimated that 4 p.c. leave school before they have mastered their three R's; 60 p.c. reach high school entrance; 45 p.c. spend at least one year on high school work; nearly 20 p.c. finish high school; 12 p.c. go beyond high school, and 3 p.c. graduate from university. The improvement in literacy in the ten years between 1921 and 1931 was not so much in crossing the barrier above-mentioned as in raising those who do cross to liigher grades. The decade was conspicuous as one of educational enthusiasm — one might call it educational inflation. The desire to spread high school education among all ranks of the population probably over-stepped the mark in attempting to spread it among all ranks of intellectual capacity as well as social ranks. This, of course, is a weakness common to all enthusiasms.

It is clear that the 4 p.c. (iUiterate) is too small a figure to have much significance as an index of the educational status of the population. In a crowd of 100 persons 4 iUiterates would carry little weight and probably would not be very conscious of any lack in their educa- tional equipment. They would hear as much of what was going on in the world as they could obtain, in any case, by reading. In 1891, when there were .15 in such a crowd, it meant something. However, this is only on condition that 4 and only 4 could be found in every crowd of 100 and that, except for their illiteracy, they were the same kind as the rest. The chances of this were probably greater in 1891 than now and still more so when nearly half the population was illiterate. Then, some very intelligent and enterprising persons were unable to read, the only reason being that they never had had the opportunity of going to school. To-day, in a crowd of 100 persons over 85 years of age, we would probably find 16 illiterate persons. There is nothing remarkable in this, since these persons were of school age before 1856 when, in Canada at least, there were very few school advantages. Of the 309,400 persons in the 1931 Census who were unable to read,

26

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 27

over 42,000 or nearly one-seventh, were past school age at the date of Confederation. There is very little significance in the fact that they were illiterate. They were probably the same type of persons as those who could read, except that due to conditions of settlement they had had no opportunity of going to school. It is a different matter to know that there were 20,645 persons at ages 20-24 who could not read. These are past school age now but were well within school age in 1921 when the country was well settled and school facilities sufficient — at least in Canada. These must be a different type from the rest of the population. The interesting thing about them is not that they are illiterate but why. It is still more surprising that over 6,000 of them were living in urban centres and did not belong to any single province. Clearly their place of residence had nothing to' do with their iUiteracy. Except in the case of immigrants, these persons were living in Canada at ages 10-14 in 1921. In that year (1921) about 103,000 at ages 10-14 years were not at school for any period, of whom many, of course, were out of school. because they had finished their education but it can be shown that of these 103,000 as many persons had never been to school as would explain the 20,000 illiterates ten years later. Now, the question is changed to "why were these persons never at school?" If they had gone to school, their illiteracy could be connected with their mentaUty but, as it was, the explanation is rendered very difficult. It will be shown later that there is no single explanation. It is probably in line with the experience in measuring any other attribute that is being gradually eliminated. At one time, so much of iUiteracy was explained by the fact that there were no opportunities for school attendance that this explanation seemed to cover the whole ground. As the attribute grows smaller and smaller the few major causes are eliminated, leaving hundreds of minor causes that were not visible while the big ones were present. Ten years ago the biggest cause was race. This still holds but it is not nearly so large as then and we still have illiteracy. Another big cause that remains is age, i.e., the fact that there are still living, persons who were of school age when the country was undeveloped, but we have just seen that 20,000 persons were illiterate and had never been at school at an age and time when it seemed impossible to escape going to school. At 15-19, when practically every person is still of school age and has been long enough at school to learn to read, there were 16,253 unable to read in 1931 and of these, 12,010 were at ages 10-14. It is difficult to imagine the existence of such numbers as these at the present date. Who are they? Why are they illiterate?

Distribution of Illiteracy. — To recapitulate the statement just made of illiteracy in Canada, 3 • 79 p.c. of the population 10 years of age and over could not read, i.e., roughly 4 persons out of every 100. This, of course, pools all persons regardless of age, sex, race or geographical position. The question arises as to which of two supposed conditions would be the more desirable: (1) that these 4 were found in every group of 100 persons (10 years and over) throughout Canada or (2) that they be segregated so that most such groups would have no illiterates, while a few groups would have a large number. If we regard illiteracy as an evil which it is desirable to eradicate, the answer to the question depends upon whether it is easier to eliminate a given quantity (in this case 309,396 persons) when it is widespread or when it is segregated. In so far as illiteracy is caused by want of oppor- tunity, clearly the best condition of elimination is that a few illiterate persons be scattered among a large number of literate persons for, under such a condition, example or imitation would bring about elimination; but "want of opportunity" under such a condition is self-contradictory. In so far as a few illiterates exist among a large number of literates under exactly the same conditions it is absurd to speak of lack of opportunity as the cause. There must be segregation if we are to admit the idea of "want of opportunity". Concepts of segregation have already been mentioned, e.g., age, race, geographical distribution and sex (both age and race involving the idea of want of opportunity in the past rather than in the present). If, then, the illiterates were widespread as supposed, clearly it would be impossible to eradicate them by furnishing them with opportunity. Where they are thus widespread in small numbers there must be bed-rock of anti-social forces which is very difficult to remove. Where they are segregated— geographically or otherwise— the problem of elimination seems capable of solution.

SEGREGATION OF ILLITERACY

This, then, leads to the question of whether the 309,396 ilUterates of Canada are segregated, and if so to what extent. It is necessary to answer this question in any case before bringing up such matters as provincial comparisons.

28 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

t

To illustrate cases of segregation, out. of the 309,396 illiterates in Canada 36,533 were Indians and Eskimos. This is probably the best example of segregation. This inclusion of Indians affects provincial rates of iUiteracy very markedly and probably makes comparison unfair. Indian educa- tion is a Dominion problem, not a Provincial. The Indians whose illiteracy is thus given are situated on reserves, consequently very definitely segregated. According to a measure of segrega- tion, the Indians in Canada are more segregated than any other race except the Hebrews. The difference to provincial comparison caused by excluding and including Indians is shown in Table 1. A further analysis of provincial comparison will be made later in its proper place.

The differences in the percentage of ilhteracy arising from the exclusion of the Indians for the various provinces are as follows: —

p.c.

CANADA 0-39

Prince Edward Island 0-07

Nova Scotia 0-09

New Brunswick 0-07

Quebec 0-10

Ontario 019

Manitoba 0-58

Saskatchewan 0-67

Alberta 0-82

British Columbia . . 1-39

Yukon 19-41

Northwest Territories 15 • 11

To come back to the main question of segregation, clearly it is an important matter vvhich should be exhaustively treated. As already indicated there are several forms of segregation varying in importance in their bearing upon the connection between segregation and elimination. The most important form on a priori grounds would seem to be geographical segregation. If we segregate illiteracy' geographically we can attack it en masse. In this connection a map is here given showing the segregation of illiteracy by the counties or census divisions of Canada. In this map ilhteracy rates are shown under nine classes as follows: —

Less than 0-75 p.c. occurring in 1 county;

0-75- 1-5 p.c. occurring in 24 counties;

1-5 - 3-0 p.c. occurring in 53 counties;

3-0 - 4-5 p.c. occurring in 34 counties;

4-6 - 6-0 p.c. occurring in 35 counties;

6-0 - 7-5 p.c. occurring in 29 counties;

7-5 - 9-0 p.c. occurring in 15 counties;

9-0 -12-0 p.c. occurring in 14 counties; 12-0 p.c. and over occurring in 17 counties.

Now a county or census division is too large an area for purposes of a scientific measurement of segregation, since a large area like this is apt to have several degrees of segregation which are concealed when aggregated. Clearly the municipahty would be a better unit both because of its smaller size and because it is a legal unit responsible to a certain extent for its own educational facilities. However, the county is the only unit for which we have data (except individual cities and towns) and although not a very good unit it will give a fair idea of the extent of the segrega- tion.

Geographical Distribution and Segregation. — The following chart shows the number of

counties having 1, 2, 3, p.c. ilhteracy respectively. This gives a picture of the frequency

of different degrees of ilhteracy which the map cannot furnish. Lookmg at this picture it strikes the eye that there is not much geographical segregation until we reach a percentage higher than 8. Above this percentage there are 37 scattered counties or census divisions (the Yukon and North- west Territories being regarded as census divisions) which clearly stand apart from the main body. These 37 counties have 7-8 p.c. of the popiJation of Canada and 81,977 or 26-5 p.c. of the 309,396 illiterates. If these counties had the same rate as the whole of Canada (3-79 p.c.) they would have 24,155 illiterates so that the remainder of the 81,977 or 57,822 may be considered definitely segregated. If this segregation were deducted from the 309,396 illiterates, Canada as a whole would have 3-08 p.c. instead of 3-79 p.c.

lylAP=» I

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

29

Charh I

NCOF CASES

30

20

10

FREQUENCY OF ILLITERACY RATES

IN

222 COUNTIES AND CENSUS DIVISIONS

OF

CANADA

1931

N?OF CASES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 _32 33 + PER CENT ILLITERACY

With the exception of the 37 places clearly indicated on Chart 1 and mentioned as contain- ing 81,977 of the illiterates, it is apparent that there is not much geographical segregation of illit- eracy in Canada. Of course, as mentioned, the county is too large a unit. Illiteracy may be segre- gated within the county. An example of such segregation is Indian reserves. Still, apart from Indian reserves, it is doubtful that such internal segregation exists. It is probable that the chart presents a true picture. Up to the limit of 8 p.c, illiteracy in Canada is widespread. The number of counties \\'ith less than 1 p.c. iUiteracy is far too few, and those between 1 and 8 p.c. are far too

Chart- 2

PERCENT ILLITERACY

30

20

GEOGRAPHICAL SEGREGATION

OF

ILLITERACY FOR CANADA

(asawKole)

1931

PER CENT ILLITERACY

30

20 40 60 80 100 - 120 140 160 160 200 220

NUMBER OF COUNTIES

30

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

many to justify any hope that geographically, illiteracy is so segregated that it can easily bo eliminated. In other words, 227,400 illiterates are spread fairly evenly over 185 counties and the 4 p.c. illiteracy of Canada cannot be said to give an exaggerated idea of the extent of the country's illiteracy.

A still clearer picture is furnished by Chart 2 on the base of which is marked off the number of counties in Canada and percentages illiterate are marked off vertically. If all the counties had 4 p.c. the picture would be in a rectangle 222 long and 4 high. The actual picture is hke a topographical cross-section sloping gently upwards most of the way and then rising sharply in a peak. With the exception of this sharp rise (already pointed out in the case of the 37 places) the gradualness of the slope is remarkable. The number of counties with the average illiteracy or more is unexpectedly large.

Since it has been seen that geographical segregation of ilhteracy has not proceeded to any great extent, it remains to ascertain whether there are other forms of segregation. Three such forms immediately suggest themselves, viz., age, racial and rural. If illiterates tend to be confined to older ages it is clear that they are segregated to this extent. Furthermore, their ehmination is certain through no other agency than time. It cannot be hastened and it cannot be stopped.

Age Segregation. — The extent to which illiteracy is segregated by age is shown in Chart 3.* This chart shows a high degree of segregation. Percentages higher than the average (3-73) are confined to 36 p.c. of the population, viz., those over 40 years of age. The number of iUiterates accounted for by this 36 p.c. was 186,377 out of the 304,513. If this segregated part had the same percentage illiterate as the rest, it would have 110,167, so that the difference, viz., 76,210; may be considered segregated illiteracy inevitably removable by time. The schools can do nothing for this segregation; time alone will bring about the ehmination.

Chart 3

PE.R CENT ILLITERACY

AGE SEGREGATION OF

ILLITERACY FOR CANADA

AT STATED AGES

(Nine provinces)

PER CENT

ILUTERACV

25-29 30-34 35-39 "50-4»

y^GEL OF=?CDL_JP=>S

4W9 5054 55-59 60-64

65-e

It should be clearly seen that there is a great difference between the extent of segregation shown in Chart 3 (the age segregation) and that shown in Chart 2 (the geographical). In the geographical chart, very httle segregation was shown — the average or over obtaining in as many as 126 out of the 222 counties; in the age chart the average or over was shown in only 36 out of 100 divisions of the population separated by age.

*For the balance of the study of illiteracy in Canada it is considered advisable to take into account only the nine prov- inces, the Yukon and Northwest Territories being excluded because of their lack of comparability with the other provinces.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

31

-NUMBER! AND PERCENTAGE ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY QUINQUENNIAL AGE GROUPS, CANADA,' 1931

Age Group	Population 10 Years and over	Illiterates 10 Years and over
	No.	P.O.	No.	PC.
	8,155,391 163 1,072 4,928 19,120 49,130 98.559 171,434 230,853 294,087 366,468 487,994 584.469 645.270 087.594 707,825 785,294 910,121 1,038,363 1,072,647	100-00 3 0-01 0-06 0-23 0-60 1-21 2-10 2-83 3-61 4-49 5-98 7-17 7-91 8-43 8-68 9-63 11-16 12-73 13 15	304,053 80 296 941 2,949 6,7,39 12,304 18,845 20,786 21,566 23,769 25,380 26,994 25,728 24,798 22,858 23,162 20,183 15,563 11.112	3-73
	49-08
95-99	27-61
90-94	19-09
85-89	15-42
80-84	13-72
75-79	12-48
70-74	10-99
65-69	9-00
60-64	7-33
55-59	6-49
50-54	5-20
45-49	4-62
40-44	3-99
35-39 .'	3-61
30-34	3-23
25-29	2-95
20-24	2-22
15-19	1-50
10-14	1-04

'Stated ages only. 'Nino provinces only. 'Less than one one-hundredth of one per cent.

Racial Segregation. — It is necessary first to decide whether racial segregation of illiteracy is segregation at all, or any more segregation than exists in any chance group of people. The only justification for accepting such a concept as racial segregation of iUiteracy would be that the races held themselves apart and were responsible for their own illiteracy and that some means could be used or some process set at work which would eliminate en masse this form of illiteracy. If the races mingled freely then we could not accept the theory concept of racial segregation, for in this case the individual of one race would be in the same position as that of another. As a matter of fact, races do keep themselves segregated even in the case of the Canadian born, while there is a distinct segregation in the case of the foreign bom by the mere accident of country of birth. Consequently it will be necessary to chart the racial segregation of illiteracy in the same way as the geographical and age. Chart 4 needs no introductory explanation as it is on exactly the same principle as Chart 3. The races are severally represented as percentages of the popula- tion so that the total population shown horizontally is 100 p.c.

II.— NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY RACIAL ORIGIN, IN DESCENDING ORDER OF ILLITERACY RATE, CANADA', 1931

Racial Origin	Population 10 Years and over	Illiterates 10 Years and over
No.	P.C.	No.	P. C. of Race
	8.159.059' 84,306 43,839 168,345 10,961 64,880 21.290 112,282 16,502 37,432 13,384 71,953 31.879 24,719 540~ 15,112 19,124 38.107 2,157.760 6,041 130,218 21,496 368.179 115.401 66,114 27.371 74,095 15,593 1,006,234 2,239,212 1,105,970 50, 720	100-00 1-03 0-54 2-06 013 0-80 0-26 1-38 0-20 0-26 0-16 0-88 0-39 0-30 0-01 0-19 0-23 0-47 26-45 0-07 1-60 0-26 4-51 1-41 0-81 0-34 0-91 0-19 13-02 27-44 13-56 0-62	304,513»-< 31.,710 7.627 23.463 1.450 8.528 2.688 13.193 1.849 3,929 1,403- 0,580 2.823 2.098 45 1,229 1,449 2,517 133,300 300 4,955 731 9.464 2,326 815 317 814 172 10,825 18,515 9,182 209	3-73
	37-61
	17-40
Ukrainian	13-94
Other Asiatic	13-23
	13- 14
	12-63
Polish	11-75
	11-20
	10-50
	10-48
Italian	9-14
	8-86
Czech and Slovak	8-49
	8-33
	8-13
	• 7-58
	6-61
French	6-18
	4-97
	3-81
	3-40
German	2-57
Dutch	2-02
	1-23
Danish	116
	1-10
	1-10
Irish	1-08
	0-83
Scottish '	0-83
Other British	0-41

^Nine provinces only. ^includes 3. C68 of unstated age.

'Includes 460 of unstated age. ^Includes 7 of unstated racial origin.

32

-Chart 4

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

PER CENT ILLITERACY

35

30 25 20 15 10 5

•Oil

RACIAL SEGREGATION

OF

ILLITERACY FOR CANADA

1931

(Nine provinces)

.1... -QAN AQA. AVERACjE. 3.73. .

OTHER BRITISH , SCOTTISH AND EINGL-ISH

IRISH AND SCANDINAVIAN

DUTCH, GERMAN, BELGIArs

HEBREWS, FRENCH AND

FINNISH

PER CENT

ILUTERACY 35

30

25

20

SLAVS, LATINS AND COLOURED

The racial segregation is slightly less than the age, i.e., percentages greater than the average (3-73) are confined to 38 p.c. of the population whereas in the age it was confined to 36 p.c. This 38 p.c. accounted for 251,143 of the total illiterates which, excluding the Yukon and North- west Territories, were 304,513, i.e., accounted for about 82 p.c. of the ilUterates of the nine prov- inces. If we give this 38 p.c. the same iUiteracy as the average of Canada (3-73) it would have 114,462, so that over 136,000 (the area represented by the shaded portion of the chart) illiterates may be said to be accounted for by racial segregation, a much larger number than that by geo- graphical or age. Of course it must be remembered that the geographical, age and racial figures are not mutually exclusive. Further on, an attempt will be made to separate them.

Chart 4 has many interesting points. There are four definite steps in racial segregation: (1) the "other" British, Scottish and Enghsh; (2) the Irish, Scandinavians, Dutch, Germans, Belgians, Hebrews and unspecified; (3) the French and Finnish, and (4) the Slavs, Latins and Coloured. This is clearly shown in Statement II, immediately preceding the chart.

Now, is the racial segregation capable of being attacked in the same way as the geographical or of yielding to time in the same way as the age, or is there any steady process of ehmination? Decidedly so. The eliminating factor in this case is Canadian or British birth. Especially under immigration restrictions, the proportion Canadian- (or British-) born of the various races increases very rapidly. The actual progress of elimination will be shown in Chapter III.

In the racial segregation chart is noticeable a certain plateau, viz., that of the French and Finnish. It is only fair to point out that concealed by this plateau are other forms of segre- gation, one of them particularly heavy, viz., age. While the percentage illiterate among the French race 10 years of age and over is a little over 6, this percentage is really not representative if a large proportion of the illiterates are confined to older ages, since time will inevitably remove these illiterates without any further effort on the part of schools. To emphasize tliis point Chart 5 below shows the segregation by age in the province of. Quebec, the data of which province come sufficiently near to representing the whole of the French race.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

33

III.— NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE' ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY QUINQUENNIAL AGE GROUPS, QUEBEC, 1931

Age Group	Population 10 Years and over	Illiterates 10 Years and over
No.	P.C.	No.	P.C. of Age Group
	2,166,867 22 237 1,168 4,687 12,713 24,415 40,353 54,703 69,300 86,976 110,620 131,636 152,687 174,068 194,178 226,422 267,116 299,858 315,809	100-00 2 001 0-05 0-21 0-69 M3 1-86 2-52 3-20 4-01 5-11 6-07 7-05 8-03 8-96 10-45 12-33 13-84 14-67	103,103 10 88 360 1,213 3,154 5,669 7,970 . 8,436 8,541 8,889 8,480 8,282 7,535 6,759 6,221 6,147 6,172 5,593 3,685	4-76 45-45
100 and over
05-99	37-13 30-82 26-44 24-81 22-81 19-75 15-42 •12-32 10-22 7-67 6-29 4-93 3-88 3-20 2-71 2-31 1-87 1-17
90-94
85-89
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-04
66-69
50^4
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19 :
10-14

^Percentages based on stated ages only. *Losa than one one-hundredth of one per cent.

Chart 5

PER CENT lUJTERACY

30

zo

AGE SEGREGATION

OF-

ILLITERACY IN THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

1931

PER CENT ILLITERACY

30

hich is tahen as typi

- -^ typical oF the distribution oF the Trencn race in Canada)

20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 ^=^CBE: C3P=!C3U_)F=S

It is seen in this chart that the illiteracy of Quebec is raised above the average of the nine provinces solely by persons over. 35 years of age and above its own average by persons over 40;' also, that there is a very heavy segregation towards the older ages,' e.g.-, out of the 103,103.illiterate persons over 10 years of age, 75,285 were over 35 years of age and 68,526 wore over 40 years of age, i.e., about 66 p.c. of. the illiterates were over 40, while less than 32 p.c. of the population 10 years of age and over, was over this age. If we give this 32 p.c. the average illiteracy of Canada at all ages 10 years and over, it would have 25,715 .illiterates, so that the difference of 42,811 is- segregated over the ages of 40 and removable by a short lapse of time without any effort on the- part of schools. Meanwhile, of course, the schools will be at work reducing the illiteracy of the rest.

47652-3

34 CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

To go back to the plateau on Chart 4, it is now clear that there is a very considerable segre- gation concealed. Similarly with the other races, there are age, geographical, and particularly foreign-birth forms of segregation concealed in the racial picture.

Rural Segregation. — Rural segregation cannot be illustrated as easily as the other forms because there are only two things to compare, i.e., rural and urban, and because the dividing line between rural and urban is very indefinite in so far as the bearing upon illiteracy is concerned. Rural areas contain a great variety of illiteracy rates, a large proportion of which are geographical rather than rural as such. However, we cannot avoid, distinguishing between urban and rural iUiteracy and the inference that the rural represents lack of opportunity. The percentage illit- erate (10 years and over) in rural parts of Canada as a whole (Yukon and Northwest Territories included) was 5 • 58 and in urban 2-33. The rural population 10 years of age and over was 3,664,696 or about 45 p.c. of the total population 10 years and over and the number of rural ilhterates at these ages was 204,471, leaving about 105,000 urban illiterates. With the same percentage iUiteracy as the average of Canada the rural parts would have 138,892 so that 65,579 illiterates might be considered as rural segregation in 45 p.c. of the population. However, this idea of segregation is rather far fetched. It is only mentioned here for purposes of analogy with the other cases of segregation illustrated.

MEASUREMENT OF THE MAJOR INFLUENCES CONTRIBUTING TO ILLITERACY IN CANADA

In discussing segregation of illiteracy four major influences were mentioned, one of which could hardly be considered a case of segregation. These were: (1) geographical; (2) age; (3) race; (4) rural residence. To these may now be added sex for the sole reason that males happen to have a higher percentage illiterate than females. It may be mentioned here in anticipation of what follows that this sex influence will turn out to be almost illusory, being merely a resultant of the accident of distribution among the other influences. Now is it possible to measure the relative weights of these influences? Clearly we must abandon the first (geographical) for the reason already given, viz., that the county is too large a division. An attempt will now be made to measure the other four.

Tables 3 and 4 are intended to give a complete picture of these influences. Table 3 gives iUiteracy in percentages, by age, sex, rural and urban and provinces. Table 4 gives the racial, in addition to the age, sex, rural and urban picture, distinguishing, however, only between British and other races, and the ages 10-14 and older ages. A justification for this distinction of race has already been demonstrated in Chart 4, but the main reason for it here is to pair off each influence with its opposite.

To take first Table 4, where the comparison is in pairs, it is seen (in the Canada total) that the urban females of the British races at the ages 10-14 years have 0 • 19 p.c. iUiterate. This we may consider for the time being as an irreducible minimum. The influences responsible for this figure may be regarded as legion and individually unimportant, e.g., 19 per 10,000 or 1 in 526 is probably smaUer than the proportion of feeble-minded in the country, to say nothing of accidents of aU sorts preventing school attendance. In direct contrast to this we have the rural males of other races at older ages with 11-63 p.c. iUiterate. Here we have a combination of major causes — rural residence, sex, race and age, making 1 1 • 63 p.c, sixty-one times as large as 0 • 19. Can we measure the separate contribution of each of the four major causes to this 61? The principle upon which such a measurement is based, is as foUows: if we consider separately (1) British and other races; (2) age 10-14 and all older ages; (3) rural and urban, and (4) males and females, and take the percentage iUiterate of each pair under a variety of conditions— ideaUy, under aU possible condi- tions but, actually, a very large variety wiU do — the unweighted average iUiteracy of each of the pairs should furnish a fair comparison. The unweighted average is used so as to give no one condition any advantage over the other.

In Tables 3 and 4 such conditions are represented. In Table 3, the percentages illiterate of the males and females, rural and urban, are shown for every quinquennial age group in the nine provinces, i.e., the males and females are compared under 318 conditions; similarly, rural and urban. In Table 4, the British race is compared with other races and the age group 10-14 is compared

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

35

with older ages for rural and urban in the nine provinces, i.e., under 72 different conditions. These two tables, as they are, furnish material for comparison even without further analysis.

To carry the analysis further, however, the various conditions are differentiated quantita- tively. In other words instead of adding up the percentages British and other races, rural and urban, male and female and by provinces, we arrange the percentage ilUterate of the other races corresponding to the percentage ilUterate of the British in group intervals according as the percentage illiterate of the other races is less than 1, 1, 2, 3 p.c. and so on. This shows what relationship exists at different stages and suggests what liind of average figure should be used in the comparison. For smooth results cumulative intervals are used instead of individual. In the four following statements a comparison is made between: (1) all other races with British; (2) older ages with age 10-14; (3) rural with urban, and (4) males with females. • /

IV.— ILLITERACY OF OTHER RACES COMPARED WITH THAT OF BRITISH RACES UNDER 72

DIFFERENT CONDITIONS, ASSUMING A SAMPLE OF 100 PERSONS BEING

TAKEN FROM EACH CONDITION, CANADA, 1931

	Number of. Conditions	Number Illiterate
P.C. Illiterate	Aggregate	Average
	Other Races	■ British Races	Other Races	British Races
Under 1	16 22 30 33 34 42 40 62 58 59 01 64 66 67 68 70 72	7-61 16-33 35-55 45-97 50 89 95-01 121-69 165-69 215-85 225-42 246-06 280-72 305-39 319-97 335-76 368-56 420-90	3-84 7-37 12-43 15-50 16-66 23-62 27-07 32-66 38-37 39-64 44-24 47-69 53-68 57-87 58-43 60-66 64-76	0-48 0-74 1-18 1-39 1-50 2-26 2-64 3-19 3-72 3-82 4-03 4-39 4-63 4-78 4-94 6-27 5-86	0-24 0-34 0-41 0-47 0-49 0-56 0-59 0-63 0-66 0-67 0-73 0-75 0-81 0-86 0-86 0-87 0-90
" 2
3
" 4
" 5
6
7
8
" 9
" 10
" 11
" 12
13
" 15
" 16
17
23 plus

v.— ILLITERACY OF OLDER AGES COMPARED WITH THAT OF AGES 10-14 UNDER 72 DIFFERENT

CONDITIONS, ASSUMING A SAMPLE OF 100 PERSONS BEING TAKEN

FROM EACH CONDITION, CANADA, 1931

	Number of Conditions	Number Illiterate
P.C. Illiterate	Aggregate ,	Average
*	Older Ages	10-14 Years	Older Ages	10-14 Years
Under 1 '.	22 27 32 35 36 45 49 53 68 59 61 64 66 67 68 70 72	10-75 18-40 29-97 40-30 44-49 94-15 120-73 160-15 192-13 201-70 222-34 257-00 281-67 296-26 312-04 344-84 397-18	5-37 7-87 11-11 14-40 16-81 23-87 26-86 29-95 36-54 37-64 43-41 50-00 64-16 58-00 60-70 73-80 88-48	0-49 0-68 0-94 1-15 1-24 2-09 2-46 2-83 3-31 3-42 3-64 4-02 4-27 4-42 ' 4-59 4-93 5-52	0-24
" 2	0-29
3
4	0-41
5 ,.:	0-44
6 ■:
7	0-53
" 8	0*57
9
" 10
" 11	0'71
12
13	0-82
" 16
" 16	0*89
" 17
23 plus	1-23

47662-31

36

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

VI —ILLITERACY OF RURAL COMPARED WITH THAT OF URBAN UNDER 317 DIFFERENT CON- DITIONS, ASSUMING A SAMPLE OF 100 PERSONS BEING TAKEN FROM EACH CONDITION, CANADA, 1931

	Number of Conditions	Number Illiterate
P.C. Illiterate	Aggregate	Average
	Rural	Urban	Rural	Urban
Under 1	4 29 53 79 104 124 138 157 176 186 198 208 213 217 223 233 240 245 254 257 262 271 275 317	3-09 41-84 102-02 192-44 305 10 416-27 507-29 648-40 809-36 904-15 1,029-14 1,144-80 1,207-18 1,261-02 ■ 1,346-65 1,602-58 1,618-03 1,706-18 1,873-29 1,931-89 2,033-96 2,227-45 2,317-07 3,808-38	1-88 18-24 51-89 98-70 159-33 218-13 265-59 325-35 424-87 471-39 608-76 55711 581-19 601-12 627-24 740-43 780-50 803-75 863-42 885-20 933-69 995-70 1,024-26 1,640-51	0-77 1-44 1-92 2-44 2-93 3-36 3-68 4-13 4-60 4-86 5-20 6-50 5-67 6-81 604 6-45 6-74 6-96 7-38 7-52 7-76 8-22 8-43 12-01	0-47
" 2	0-63
" 3	0-98
" 4	1-26
« 5	1-53
" 6	1-76
7	1-92
" 8	207
" 9	2-41
" 10	2-63
" 11	2-57
" 12	2-68
" 13	2-73
" 14	2-77
" 15	2-81
" 16	3-18
" 17	3-25
" 18	3-28
" 19	3-40
" 20	3-44
" 21	3-56
" 22	3-67
" 23	3-72
23 plus i	5-18

VII.

-ILLITERACY OF MALES COMPARED WITH THAT OF FEMALES UNDER 318 DIFFERENT CON- DITIONS, ASSUMING A SAMPLE OF 100 PERSONS BEING TAIiEN FROM , EACH CONDITION, CANADA, 1931

	Number ol Conditions	Number Illiterate
P.C. Illiterate	Aggregate	Average
	Males	Females	Males	Females
Under 1 . . . .' ;	19 44 92 122 154 177 191 206 223 227 238 240 261 255 260 264 268 274 278 281 284 288 290 318	9-78 48-02 166-57 270-73 413-69 538-86 628-66 739-42 884-13 922-34 1,037-10 1,128-54 1,191-22 1,246-11 1,317-30 1,379-78 1,445-42 1,550-46 1,624-79 1,683-39 1,744-90 1,830-47 1,875-04 2,837-40	12-23 46-01 142-50 228-85 388-76 609-04 694-94 -- —707-52 849-85 885-75 998-41 1,086-76 1,163-67 1,199-15 1,275-41 1,348-34 1,403-75 1,518-11 1,695-65 1,661-55 1,706-34 1,799-37 1,829-16 2,765-93	0-61 1-09 1-81 2-22 2-69 3-04 3-29 3-59 3-96 4-06 4-36 4-59 4-75 4-89 6-07 5-23 5-39 6-66 6-84 5-99 6-14 6-36 6-47 8-92	0-64
" 2	1-05
" 3	1-55
" 4 •. .	1-88
" 5	2-62
6	2-88
" 7	3-11
" 8	3-43
" 9	3-81
" 10 11	3-90 4-20
" 12., '. .	4-42
" 13	4-64
" 14	4-70
" 15	4-91
" 16 .	611
" 17	5-24
" 18	5-54
" 19	5-74
" 20	5-91
" 21	6-01
" 22	6-25
" 23	6-31
23 plus	8-70

The next step is to arrive at a fair average figure comparing each set. Obviously the same kind of average will not apply to all alike and each of the four results must be treated separately.

Male and Female.^-This set is taken first because of its simple behaviour. It will be seen that no bias exists in the difference between male and female as we pass from lower to higher percentage ilUterate males. Throughout the range there is almost a constant difference of about 0-16 p.c. Since we have to deal with ratios, this would mean that the ratio would change very drastically according as the percentage of the males was high or low. Since, however, the differ- ence is very sinall it seems safe to take the ratio as that of. the straight average, so that male illiteracy equals 1-03 times female iUiteracy. In other words, there is practically no difference in illiteracy between males and females. The reason why males are sUghtly more illiterate than females in the total population is because of the distribution of males under more unfavourable circiunstances than those -of-the females=-^more-.r.ural,-more other races than British, and so on. This disposes fairly conclusively of one important aspect of illiteracy.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

37

Rural and Urban. — In comparing the illit- eracy of rural and urban it is remarkable that there is almost a constant ratio between them. Where the illiteracy of rural is low, that of urban is low; where the one is high the other is high; the correlation is almost perfect. This is not altogether because of the particular set of condi- tions taken — age for age, etc.; it seems to apply quite generally. It is difficult to understand the reason or reasons. If the rural parts of a certain community are more illiterate than the rural parts of another, why should the urban parts generally follow suit? A plausible reason is that persons of the same type live in or pass back and forth in both rural and urban parts. The ratio of rural to urban illiteracy would seem to be safely put at 2 08, i.e., rural is 2-08 times as illiterate as urban, other conditions being con- stant.

Older Ages and Ages 10-14. — The age group 10-14 is taken in comparison with all older ages because this age shows the least illiteracy. It is, so to speak, the stage of perfection to which the advantages of our present school system have carried us. Of course, there is no reason why there should be any illiteracy at this ago since the youngest member of it is old enough to have learned to read. In spite of this there is a wide variety of rates of illiteracy at this age under different conditions. Urban females in the ag- gregate of the nine provinces show 0-33 p.c. illiterate while rural males show 1-86 p.c. and in one province as much as 4-21 p.c. When tlie illiteracy at 10-14 is compared with that at older ages by the same means as used in the other comparisons it is found that the ratio is almost constant. The older ages are 5 09 times as illiterate as the ages 10-14.

British Races and Other Races. — The

British races are taken as the standard because they show the lowest percentage illiteracy. It is rather remarkable, however, that although they are consistently less iUiterate than the ag- gregate of other races, their illiteracy is higher where that of the other races is higher and lower where the latter is lower, and this is an almost constant ratio. In other words the ur- ban British and the urban other races at the younger age are both low, but the British lower by a certain ratio than the other races. The rural British are higher than the urban British at the same age and the rural other races are more illiterate than the rural British by the same ratio as before and so on. This ratio is 5-65.

Charh 6

THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OFSEX,RURAL RESIDENCE, AGE AND RACE IN ILLITERACY

12.0 — (l-OGarithmic scale) Il.O-

10.0 — 9.0 —

35 -

2.5

CANADA 1931 .

^RACEl'

^AGE

RURAL RESIDENCE

-SEX

URBAN BR.-BORN FE. MALES 10-14 YEARS OF" AGE

38

CENSUS OF- CANADA, 1931

We have now established four ratios, viz., (in order of size) (1) other races to British, 5-65; (2) older ages to 10-14, 5-09; (3) rural to urban, 2-08, and (4) male to female, 1-03. When these ratios are multiplied they come to 61-61 and ought, if satisfactorily correct, to tell us the illiteracy of the rural male other races at older ages, if we know that of the urban female British at 10-14. The illiteracy of the latter' in Canada is 0-19 p.c. Multiplying this by 61-61 it comes to 11-71. Now this is almost exactly the illiteracy of the rural male other races at older ages in Canada which is 11-63 p.c. so that these ratios seem to stand the test.

ILLITERACY BY PROVINCES

Common usage compares figures of illiteracy for provinces. Enough has already been said to indicate that this is an undesirable and unfair practice. The figures of illiteracy of any province do not reflect the educational status or system of that province. There would be some point in comparing the illiteracy for the same age, sex and race by provinces, but not the total unqualified percentages. The total percentage may mean that there are more older persons in one province than another, e.g., suppose we compare by provinces the illiteracy of males at ages 70-747 i.e., persons born before Confederation, and of males 10-14. This comparison is as follows: —

VIII.-NUMERICAL AND PERCENTAGE COMPARISON OF ILLITERACY OF MALES 70-74 YEARS OF

AGE (BORN BEFORE CONFEDERATION) AND THOSE 10-14 YEARS OF AGE,

CANADA AND PROVINCES, 1931

	Age Group
	70-74	10-14	10 and over"
	Total .	Illiterate	Total	Illiterate	P.C. Illit- erate
	No. 1 P.C.	No. 1 P.C.

MALES

CANADA

Prince Edward Island

Nova Scotia

New Brunswick

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Saskatchewan

Alberta

British Columbia

Yukon

Northwest Territories

1

5

4

20, 35,

5.

5,

4,

11,106

103

616

757

5,044

2,205

622

796

464

467

18

14

12-54

S-24 10-85 18-24 24-95

6-23 12-08 14-45 10-10

7-14 17-31 60-87

542,930

4.790 28,662 23,756 158,149 161,623 38,968 55,606 40,458 30,180 158 580

6,673

34 396 759 2,120 933 460 589 430 463

76 413

1-23

C-71 1-38 3-19 1-34 0-58 1-18 1-06 1-08 1-53 48-10 71-21

4-32

3 09 4-92 8-76 0-21 2-71 4-05 3-66 3 05 4-18 15-88 54-62

In examining this statement it is necessary to bear in mind that the school advantages of these two sets of persons cannot be comparable in any way. Further, it is unlikely that the persons over 70 in 1931 in the four western provinces and the Yukon were born in those provinces or living there when at school age. The percentage illiterate in a province, therefore, contains various ingredients like the one shown in these figures that have httle or nothing to do with the educational achievement of the province.

Recalling what has already been said about segregation and the influences of race, age and rural and urban distribution, it will be self-evident that the different provinces are differently affected by these, to say nothing of the geographical distribution of the population, i.e., it is well known that some provinces have outlying parts recently settled and consequently without school facilities. It is clear that the province as a political unit controlhng its education cannot be considered responsible for these influences. One outstanding case has already been 'mentioned, tnz., that the provinces are not responsible for the education of the Indians on reserves.

It will be useful to see how the provinces compare, first, under actual conditions of distribu- tion of the elements in the population which make up the major influences in illiteracy and, secondly, when these conditions of distribution are supposed to be uniform throughout the nine provinces. This is not really a matter of comparing the provinces but rather of showing how much of the difference between provinces is due to distribution.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

39

Let us first suppose that each of the nine provinces had the same distribution as the aggregate of the nine provinces in the matter of age, sex, race and rural and urban residence. In this com-, parison we are taking only pairs, viz., the British race and all other races; the ages 10-14 and all other ages, while, of course, the sexes and rural and urban are naturally in pairs. Let us suppose that each of these pairs had the same percentages illiterate as actually obtain in each province, e.g., the age group 10-14 urban females of the British race in the province of Ontario has 0-12 p.c. illiterate and Ontario has 2-35 p.c. of its population (10 years and over) in these categories while the nine provinces as a whole have 1-68 p.c. in these categories. Let Ontario be supposed still to have 0 • 12 p.c. iUiterate in this group, but to have the same proportion of the population in this as the whole of Canada. Manitoba has 0 • 18 p.c. illiterate in this group while the group is 1-58 p.c. of the population (10 years and over) of the province. Let us suppose that Manitoba also still has its own group illiteracy but that the group is the same proportion of the population as in the whole of Canada (and of course, Ontario) ; similariy with all the other provinces and all other groups. What would be the comparative percentage of illiteracy in each of the nine pro- vmces thus standardized? It may be mentioned that this is an orthodox method of standardiza- tion. The results of this standardization are shown in comparison with those of actual conditions in Statement IX following:^

TV —TTTTTERACY OF THE NINE PROVINCES STANDARDIZED! FOR RACIAL, SEX, RURAL AND lA. li.ULiuii.r,K.x u URBAN AND AGE DISTRIBUTION, CANADA, 1931

	Popu- lation 10 Years and over	Illiterato	Rank
	No.	P.C.
	Standard- ized	Actual	Standard- ized	Actual	Standard- ized	Actual
CANADA	8,159,059 09,333 402,401 310,310 2,107,517 2,791,072 557,806 705,350 672,129 . 583,135	332,567 2.947 22,092 21,474 84,316 102,990 23,372 23,700 17.679 33,997	304.513 1,835 17,139 21,440 103,212 64,157 24,876 29,097 19.609 23,088	4-08 4-25 5-49 6-92 3-89 3-69 4-19 3'36 3-09 5-83	3-73 2.65 4-26 0-91 4-76 2-30 4-46 4-13 3-44 3-96	6 7 9 4 3 5 2 1 8	-
	2
	6
	9
	8
	1
	7
	5
	3
	4

'To the population distribution of Canada (nine provinces) as a whole is applied severally the specific illiteracy rates of each of the nine provinces.

In the above statement the most important feature revealed is shown in the last two columns where the standardized and actual illiteracy rank of the provinces are compared. What is brought out in these columns is the fact that some provinces are now favourably situated by their distri- bution (of age, sex, etc.), while others are unfavourably situated. Those that would be better of!, i.e., have a lower illiteracy rate with the distribution of Canada than with their own, are unfavour- ably situated; those that would be worse off are favourably situated. From this it follows that, at present, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta are unfavourably situated, so that the present illiteracy of these provinces is raised by the unfavourable distribution of their population, because if they had Canada's population and their own specific rates of iUiteracy their illiteracy would be much less than it is now. Consequently it is to the credit of these provinces that they have made more progress than was to be expected. This must not, however, be construed as a matter of educational system— it is far more than that; we could only compare educational systems if we could place the same individuals or individuals of exactly the same kind, under each of these systems. A standard of education among a group of individuals may not be due to the educational system of the province, but to such things as imitation, natural ability, provincial esprit de corps, etc.

On the other hand Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Ontario and British Columbia are favourably situated by their population distribution. The case of British Columbia, however, is misleading. The fact that the conditions have been compared only in pairs, particulariy British races against other races, makes the comparison imperfect. British Columbia has a very favour- able distribution of British races but it is unfavourably situated in the matter of other races, a fact which the table does not show. To bring this out would necessitate taking all the races separately instead of merely British and "other races". British Columbia has a large proportion of Indians and Orientals and their illiteracy is exceptionally high.

40

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

To remove misleading features of this kind let us compare the provinces standardized for age, sex, rural and urban, but not for race. The age groups in this case are not 10-14 and other ages, but each of the quinquennial groups over 10 years. The results are sho^vTi in Statement X following.

X.-ILLITERACY OF THE NINE PROVINCES STANDARDIZED! FOR SEX, RURAL AND URBAN AND AGE (QUINQUENNIAL GROUPS) DISTRIBUTION, CANADA, 1931 UKBAN

	Popu- lation 10 Years and bver^	Illiterate
Province	No.	P.C.
	Standard- ized	Actual	Standard- ized	Actual	Standard- ized	Actual
CANADA	8,155,391 69,326 402,287 310,248 2,166,867 2,790,201 557,666 706, 161 572,011 681,625	303,496 1,798 16,211 16,874 113,321 67,007 23,258 24,300 17,231 23,496	304,053 1.835 17,127 21,436 103,103 64,100 24,865 29,073 19,656 22,858	3-72 2-59 4-03 6-44 5-23 2-40 4-17 3-45 301 4-04	3-73 2-65 4-26 6-91 4-76 2-30 4-46 4-12 3-44 3-93	2 5 9 8 1 7 4 3 6
Prince Edward Island . . .	2 6
Nova Scotia
New Brunswick . .
Quebec	8 1 7 5 3 4
Manitoba
Alberta
British Columbia

'To the population distribution of Canada (nine provinces) as a whole is applied severally the specific illiteracv rates of each of the nine provinces. ^Stated ages only.

Again, examining the last two columns and remembering that there is no standardization for race, we see that only Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan are unfavourably situated while British Columbia alone is favourably situated. The remainder show no perceptible change. This shows that it was not altogether British races that favoured British Columbia in the preceding table, but age distribution as well.

In the third place let us suppose that all the handicaps of distribution had been removed instead of standardized as in the two preceding statements. We do this by allowing for each handicap the ratio shown on page 38. This premises that all the ages, races, etc., in each province had the same iUiteracy as British urban females at ages 10-14. The results are shown in the following statement.

XI.-ILLITERACY OF THE NINE PROVINCES COMPARED AFTER CORRECTING FOR HANDICAPS OF SEX, AGE, RURAL DISTRIBUTION AND RACE, CANADA, 1931

	Population ■ 10 Years and over	Illiterate
Province	No.	P.C.
	Corrected	Actual	Corrected	Actual	Corrected	Actual
CANADA	8,159,059 69,333 402,401 310.316 2,167,517 2,791,072 557,806 705,350 672,129 583,136	12.652 152 1,419 928 3,489 3,640 793 887 690 754	304.513 1,835 17,139 21,440 103,212 64,157 24.876 29,097 19,669 23,088	016 0-22 0'35 0-30 0-16 0-13 0-14 0-13 oao 013	3-73 2-65 4-26 6-91 4-76 2-30 4-46 4-13 3-44 3-96	7 9 8 6 4 5 2 1 3
	2 6 9 8 1 7 5 3 i
Quebec
Manitoba
Alberta
British Columbia. . . .

In this case, New Brunswick, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia are shown to be handicapped while Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Ontario are favour- ably situated. In all three statements it is seen that Ontario is favourably situated. This is important in view of the fact that this province has the lowest percentage illiterate of all the provinces. Removing all handicaps. Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia would appar- ently have smaller percentages illiterate than Ontario.*

•It wo take the actual urban British female at ages 10-14 in the different provinces the results compare as follows-— Prmce Edward Island 0-36; Nova Scotia 0-30; New Brunswick 0-20; Quebec 0-31; Ontario 0-12; Manitoba 0-18; Saskat- chewan 0-36; Alberta 0-15; and British Columbia 0-23.

The question may be asked as to why these figures were not used as indices of illiteracy freed from distribution handi- caps instead of the figures actually used. The chief reason is that the numbers upon which some of the above percentages are based are far too small to be representative. Another reason is that the bases.ot comparison are not uniform in this case as they were in Statement XI. To take the above figures as figures corrected for all the conditions mentioned wo would have to assume that all individuals of the British race, etc., behaved exactly in the same way, and, of course, they do not. There are urban and urban, and British and British. For the sake of comparison it is much more sound to take the idealized average behaviour for urban, etc. It is never sate to take actual conditions in any one year, especi.ally when based upon small numbers, as norms.

CHAPTER II

COMPARISON OF ILLITERACY IN CANADA WITH THAT IN

OTHER COUNTRIES

Introduction. — In a census monograph based on the data of 1921 and other sources, a comparison was drawn between illiteracy in Canada and other countries, derived in a large number of cases from direct replies to questionnaires sent to these countries. There it was shown that the methods used in measuring illiteracy by different countries varied so much that it was practi- cally impossible to use tabular matter to make the comparison. The situation has not materially altered since the date of preparation of this book. A later publication* (in 1929) by James F. Abel and Norman J. Bond emphasises this fact still more and the findings of this publication are sufficiently recent and the changes which have since taken place are probably sufficiently unim- portant to warrant making frequent use of their data here.

Areas of Least Illiteracy. — According to Abel and Bond, the areas of least iUiteracy are in Western Europe and, for the most part, along the shores of the North and Baltic Seas. Den- mark, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland claim to have little or no illiteracy. When we consider the methods of obtaining the data on the subject practised in these countries, it is clear that Germany and Great Britain can advance the same claim. In Canada, immigrants directly from these countries show a certain small percentage of illiterates and, while it is probable that their illiteracy cannot be regarded as representative of the illiteracy of the countries from which they came, the data have considerable value — probably more for purposes of comparison than data based upon the quotations from countries which do not collect data on illiteracy by means of the census.

In the Canadian Census of 1931, the illiteracy of persons 10 years of age and over was obtained by country of birth. These figures possess the great advantage of having the same age (lower) limit for all countries alike. They are probably as good as we can find anywhere for purposes of comparison. Their value as being representative of the present illiteracy of the various countries depends mainly upon the answer to the question as to whether the hteracy status of the emigrant is the same as that of the remainder of the population of his country. There is no reason why the emigrant should not be as representative a sample as the army con- script or the person signing or not signing the marriage register. Obviously, to all three applies the objection that they do not represent all age classes of the population — the conscript and the groom being definitely exclusive of the younger and older ages and the emigrant excluding a large part of these ages. We have seen in Chapter I that, in Canada, the ages of least illiteracy are those between 10 and 20 and, as these ages represent large numbers of the population, their illiteracy affects the true illiteracy rates of the population to a very high degree. Further, their illiteracy represents the ideal toward which the country is at present tending.

As already mentioned, the data in Table 5 are subject to serious objections as a basis of comparison of the ilhteracy of the different countries of the world. Undoubtedly where the num- bers represented are small they have very little value but, on the whole, objections equally, if not more, serious apply to the data on the subject collected by these countries themselves. They do not apply to the same ages and many of them apply only to certain non-representative portions of the population. The above apply to the population who emigrated, a large proportion of whom are adults and considerably more than half, males; further, the people from these countries who have been in Canada a long time have an older and, consequently, a more illiterate population, ipso facto, than those recently arrived. This appUes especially to such countries as Germany. On the whole, the table does not give a very good representation of the illiteracy of the different countries but it has a distinct value in throwing some light upon what otherwise would be in complete darkness — illiteracy for the same age hmits at the same date and obtained in exactly the same way.

^Illiteracy in the Several Countries of the World, Bulletin 1929 No. 4, Bureau of Education, Washington.

41

42

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

If, then, care is taken not to forget that the figures apply to the illiteracy of the countries as they were represented in Canada in 1931 and are not an official definite statement of the actual ilUteracy of these countries, it will be safe to arrange the percentages iOiterate in order of magni- tude for purposes of further analysis.

XII.— PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BIRTHPLACE, ARRANGED IN ASCENDING ORDER OF MAGNITUDE, CANADA, 1931

BY

Birthplace	P.C. Illiterate	Birthplace	P.C. Illiterate	Birthplace	P.C. Illiterate
'1 South Africa^ ....	0-14 0-23 0-29 0-39 0-65 0-67 0-78 0-79 1-06 1-31 i-55 1-78 1-80 1-94 1-99 2-07	17. Iceland	2-40 2-44 2-90 2-98 3-29 4-02 4-42 4-71 5-01 5-22 6-51 7-95 8-23 9-75 1001 10-14	33. Hungary	1033
2 Wales	IS. South America! 19. France	34. Bulgaria'	10'87
3 Scotland	35. Yugoslavia	10-87
	20 Canada'	36. Russia	10-90
	21. Other British'		11-92
	38. Turkey^	12-76
		39. Japan	14-80
	24. Newfoundland	40. Italy	14-87
	41. Poland	16-88
	26. Other Europe' 27. Other Countries' 28 India'	42. China	18-03
	43 . Austria	18-41
	44. Roumania	18-48
		45. Syria'	19-92
			21-28
15. Holland	31. Other Asia'		21-37
16. At sea'	32. Czechoslovakia

'Represented in Canada by less than 5,000 people over 10 years of age — a number too small for percentages illiterate to be comparable with other countries.

'Represented in Canada by less than 1,000 people over 10 years of age. ^Exclusive of Yukon and Northwest Territories and aborigines in the provinces.

From this list should obviously be omitted the birthplaces represented by less than 1,000 persons, since, if such a country had as low a percentage illiteracy as that shown for South Africa, no illiterate person would appear. This rule would exclude Spain, Armenia, Turkey, Other Asia, and "at sea". Any further exclusion would have to be purely arbitrary, but possibly 5,000 should be taken as the lowest admissible representation. This would further exclude Austraha, New Zealand, India, South Africa, British West Indies, South America, "other" British Countries, Bulgaria, "other" Europe, Syria and "other" countries. These exclusions are indicated on the list by footnote numbers. They leave thirty-one countries which can be compared.

Another point which applies to data on the total population of a country as well as to a sample like the above should be obvious. The countries with a large geographical area or with a large variety of races, such as Canada, United States, Russia, etc., are not as adequately repre- sented by a single percentage or index as the smaller countries with a single or a few closely related races. Consequently, their place in the above order is hardly fair. Probably by giving wide group intervals to the above list a fairly good basis of comparison will be furnished.

Less than 1 p.c. — The British Isles, South Africa, Australia, New

' Zealand and Lesser Isles.

Between 1 and 2 p.c. — United States, the Scandinavian Countries (except

Iceland), Holland, Switzerland. Between 2 and 3 p.c— Canada*, Iceland, France and South America. Between 4 and 5 p.c. — Germany, Belgium and Newfoundland. Between 8 and 10 p.c. — Finland and Greece. Between 10 and 12 p.c. — Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Russia and

Lithuania. Over 12 p.c. — All other countries.

That the above list compares closely in places and not so closely in others with the findings of Abel and Bond may be seen from the following quotation: "The area of least illiteracy in the world is in Western Europe . . . Though the indices on which those claims are based are unreUable,

•Exclusive of Yukon and Northwest Territories and aborigines in the provinces. >

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 43

the claims are not far from correct . . . Closely bordering on this section of little or no illiteracy are Belgium, Czechoslovakia, England and Wales, Finland, "France, the Irish Free State, the Netherlands, North Ireland and Scotland." There is little doubt, however, that with more reliable indices the United Kingdom would be found to have as low percentages as the Scandin- avian Countries and lower than other countries, remembering, of course, that large countries like United States and Canada cannot be adequately compared with other countries because of their wide areas and heterogeneous populations. Really the most remarkable achievement in the reduction of illiteracy can be attributed to these two countries, for Australia, though large, has a comparatively homogeneous population.

One of the chief values of the table given for illiteracy in Canada by birthplace is the extent to which it shows what countries are apparently sending to Canada the more illiterate portion of their population and what the less iUiterate portion. If we rely upon the claims to no illiteracy in Germany and some other countries, it is clear that Germany, the Scandinavian Countries, Holland, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia and Austria are sending their more ilhterate population, (this, of course, is partially explained by age and date of emigration), the United States, India, South America, France, Spain and "other" Eui'ope, their less iUiterate, while the British coun- tries are sending a fairly representative sample. As to other countries, the percentages illiterate are so largo in any case that it does not make much difference one way or the other. Meanwhile, the following fact is important. The countries Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Germany claim to have little or no illiteracy but 130,850 persons over 10 years of age born in these countries are living in Canada among whom are found 3,219 or 2-46 p.c. unable to read. This is almost as high a percentage as obtains among the Canadian born of all races except abori- gines; further, Canada has a vast area with many outlying parts recently settled. At the same time, there were living in Canada 1,113,912 persons 10 years of age and over from the British Isles among whom were found 4,470 or 0 -4 p.c. unable to read. This is a very high representation from the British Isles, much higher than the signatures to the marriage register or to army enhst- ments of any one year and more representative of the different ages, a fact which was seen in Chapter I to be very important. However, the ages of persons from the British Isles in Canada were not so favourable to Uteracy as those of the population remaining in the British Isles. The moral of all this would seem to be that the data on illiteracy, in the countries where no census is taken of this attribute, are unrehable and, consequently, that no purpose is served by an exhaustive analysis of what data exist. However, a brief review, based partly on the monograph of Abel and Bond is probably, useful. Following this review will be given in non-tabular form the latest available quotations of illiteracy in different countries.

Political Divisions with Population over Half Illiterate.— "The immediately striking feature of this group of eighteen countries is the immense population imder consideration, approxi- mately 618,000,000, as compared with forty-five countries having rates under 50 p.c. and their population of some 468,000,000. With the exception of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, they are in or near the Torrid Zone. Their peoples are largely indigenous, or in the American divi- sions, mixed Southern European and indigenous." Without subdividing these countries into classes according to rates of illiteracy, the list of countries with more than 50 p.c. ilhterate is as follows:

America — Colombia, British Guiana, Mexico, Porto Rico, Brazil, Nicaragua, . Venezuela, Dominican Republic, Guatemala; also in the main. Aborigines

in Canada and United States. Europe — Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Portugal. Asia — Ceylon, India, -British Malaya and, of course, several parts for which data

are not available. Africa — Egypt, non-Europeans of Union of South Africa and the great part of

the continent on which no data are available. Australasia — Philippine Islands, Dutch East Indies.

Even tills very broad statement is not wholly accurate, based as it is upon geographical ■ areas, not peoples. In Chapter I it was seen that it is next to impossible to depict satisfactorily the geographical distribution of illiteracy, owing to the other forms of segregation of illiteracy within these areas— especially age and race. The above list with the following list, however, furnishes a useful scale with which to compare the illiteracy of groups in Canada.

44

CENStJS OF CANADA, 1931

XIII.— COMPARISON or PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF VARIOUS AGE GROUPS IN CANADIAN POPULATION, 1931, WITH THE ILLITERACY OF DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

Age Group

P.C.

Illiterate (Canada)

Countries Whose Peoples as a Whole Have a Smaller Percentage Illiterate than the Canadian Age Group

10-H 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39

40-44 45-49 50-54 S5-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99

100 and over

11

1-6 2-3 3-0 3-3 3-7

41 4-6 5-3 6-6 7-4 9-0 11-0 12-6 13-8 15-5 19-1 27-7

49-1 Above any Canadian group

1 United Kingdom and North WesternEurope, Latvia; Japan except Cho Sen province, non-aboriginal / population f 10 years and over) of Australia, New Zealand and South Africa; Northern Ireland.

Canada (Canadian born 10 years and over, exclusive of aborigines).

Esthonia (10 years and over), U.S. Samoa, United States (10 years and over), Canada (10 years

and over) exclusive of Indians. Canada, all classes (10 years and over).

France (10 years and over), Czechoslovakia. Hungary, probably New Guinea. Irish Free State.

Uruguay.

Hawaii .

The Argentine Republic, Alaska, Newfoundland and Labrador (10 years and over), Virgin

Islands (U.S.A.), probably Poland. The aborigines of Canada (10 years and over), Greece (10 years and over), Lithuania.

The countries mentioned earlier with more than 50 p.c. illiterate.

Another comparison by the same method is more accurate in many respects than the fore- going. It compares the illiteracy at different age groups of the people of Canada with the illit- eracy of persons 10 years of age and over from different countries living in Canada in 1931. The data have the advantage of uniformity and definiteness.

XIV.— COMPARISON OF PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF VARIOUS AGE GROUPS IN CANADIAN

POPULATION WiTH PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF PERSONS FROM VARIOUS

COUNTRIES LIVING IN CANADA, 1931

Age Group

P.C.

Illiterate (Canada)

Countries from Which There are, Living in Canada in 1931, Persons 10 Vears of Ago and over

Whose Illiteracy is Less than That of the Specified Canadian Age Group but Greater than

That of the Next Younger Group

10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34. 35-39 40-44 45-49 60-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99 100 and over

Lessthanl-O 1

0

South Africa, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Lesser Isles.

British West Indies.

United states, Denmark.

Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Holland, At sea.

Iceland, South America, Canada (Canadian born, exclusive of aborigines), France.

"Other" British Possessions.

Germany.

Belgium.

Newfoundland, Spain, "Other" Europe.

"Other" countries.

India, Finland.

Greece, "Other" .^sia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Russia.

Lithuania.

Turkey.

Japan, Italy.

Poland, China, Austria, Roumania.

Syria, Armenia, Ukraine.

It will be noted that the aborigines of Canada, although they have a high percentage illiterate when compared with the rest of the population, have a low percentage as compared with the vast majority of the world's people. About a third of our aboriginal population 10 years of age and over are illiterate and this is rather a respectable position when taken on a world scale.

With the proviso that any assembling of material on world illiteracy is imperfect, the following summary is given of material collected from different sources.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 45

NON-TABULAR SUMMARY OF LATEST AVAILABLE DATA ON ILLITERACY IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

England and Wales. — In 1929, the number signing the marriage register by mark was 774 men and 776 women while in 1924 the numbers were 995 men and 1,041 women.

Scotland. — In 1933, out of 34,201 marriages, 34 males and 42 females signed the marriage register by mark.

Northern Ireland. — Census of 1931—1-9 p.c. males and 1-2 p.c. females signed the marriage register by mark.

Irish Free State. — This information was not tabulated in the Census of 1926. — In 1911, 2-8 p.c. of the population 9 years of age and over could read only, while 10-1 p.c. were illiterate.

The Argentine Republic. — The only information available is derived from the Census of Education, 1931. — Of the children between the ages of 5 and 13, 635,862 or 29-37 p.c. were iUiterate.

Australia. — In 1921, 0-17 p.c. of the total getting married that year signed the register by mark, 1,491 persons per 10,000 all ages, exclusive of aborigines, could not read and 28 persons per 10,000 could read only.

Austria. — The question was not included in the Census of 1920 and for only one province in 1923.

Belgium. — The Year Book of 1933 states that, of the 45,142 males who entered into active service, 891 or 1-97 p.c. were illiterate and, of the 40,557 sent into the Congo, 168 or 0-41 p.c. were illiterate. The results of the Census of 1920, taken from Driemaandblad, show illiteracy by certain age groups.

Illiterate Age Group No. p.c.

8-14 75,602 8-5

15-54 230,316 5-2

55 and over 205,002 18-9

Ceylon. — The Census of 1921 gives the percentages of illiteracy for the population 5 years of ago and over as follows: —

Total 60-1 p.c.

Male 43-7 p.c.

Female ; .- 78-8 p.c.

(Taken from the Year Book of 1926.)

Czechoslovakia. — Census of 1928: —

Population Ilhterate

5 years and over No. p.c.

Total • 12,378,321 915,201 7-39

Male 5,934,075 391,310 6-59

Female 6,444,246 523,891 8-13

Denmark. — Practically no illiteracy. — Compulsory education has been in force since 1814. For the population 10 years of age and over the rate of illiteracy is much less than 1 p.c.

Egypt.— Censm of 1927:—

Population Illiterate

10 years and over No. p.c.

Total . 10,287,778 8,816,601 85-70

Male : ■ 5,126,179 3,894,114 75-96

Female.' '..: ". . . . 5,161,599 4,922,487 95-37'

(Population is largely Egyptian.)

46

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

Illiteracy of foreigners in Egypt: —

Foreigners 10 years and over

Total '. 188,832

Male 93,580

Female 95,252

Illiterate

No. p.c.

31,748 ' 16-81

8,906 9-52

22,842 23-98

Esihonia. — Census of 1922 — Considering the population 10 years of age and over, the illiteracy in 10 Esthonian provinces was 3-4 p.c. If the province of Petseri (Russian province) is included, it was 5-6 p.c. There is practically no iUiteracy amongst the younger people. The rates for the majority of the provinces vary from 1-5 to 3-0 p.c. (Year Book of 1929.)

France. — Census of 1926 : —

Population lUiterate

5 years and over No. p.c.

Total .....: 36,574,547 2,573,253 7-04

Male 17,467,870 1,111,581 6-36

Female 19,106,677 1,461,672 7-65

10 years and over No. p.c.

Total 34,294,850 2,026,222 5-91

Male 16,314,353 830,190 5-09

Female 17,980,497 1,196,032 6-65

Out of the 226,620 conscripts in 1930, 10,461 or 4-62 p.c. could neither read nor write, and of the 338,504 marriages in 1928, 2,365 or 1-40 p.c. of the men and 3,283 or 1-94 p.c. of the women signed the register by mark.

Germany. — There is no new data available. The number of illiterates is practically negli- gible. For the population of 10 years and over it is less than 1 p.c.

Greece. — Census of 1928: —

Population Illiterate

10 years and over No. p.c.

Total 4,672,028 1,953,875 41-82

Male 2,304,942 549,033 23-82

Female 2,367,086 1,404,842 59-35

Holland. — The 1931 reports for the militia show that of the 20,560 conscripts, 20,529 or 99-85 p.c. could read and write, 0-03 could read only and 25 or 0-12 p.c. were illiterate. There is no report on illiteracy now published by the Statistical Bureau as it is practically negligible.

Hungary. — Census of 1930: —

: Illiterate

Total population No. p.c.

Total 8,688,319 1,801,570 20-70

Urban 2,811,251 * 15-10

Population Illiterate

6 years and over No. p.c.

Total 7,621,825 * 9-60

Urban * * 6-50

India. — Census of 1931 — Of the population 5 years of age and over only 156 males per 1,000 and 29 females were able to read and write.

Italy. — Census of 1931 — 21 p.c. of the population over 6 years of age were illiterate and 11-1 p.c. of the 1930 conscripts and 8-8 p.c. of those signing the marriage register, made their mark.

•Figures not available.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 47

Japan. — There are no census figures available. Of the conscripts called, there were: — in 1929—3,044 out of 585,819 or 0-52 p.c. illiterate; in 1930—2,873 out of 595,505 or 0-48 p.c. illiterate; in 1931—3,090 out of 619,146 or 0-50 p.c. illiterate. (This does not include Cho Sen province, which is much more ilhterate.)

Latvia. — Census of 1930:—

Population Cannot read Cannot write

10 years and over No. p.c. No. p.c.

Total 1,573,551 7,506 0-48 7,559 0-48

Male 720,709 4,409 0-61 4,416 0-61

Female., 852,842 3,097 0-36 3,143 0-37

Lithuania.— Frora. the Census of 1923 for Gr.-Lithuania and the Census of 1925 for Klaipeda: —

Population Ilhterate

10 years and over No. ' p.c.

Total 1,760,956 537,036 30-5

Male : ' 829,188 238,066 28-7

Female 931,768 298,970 32- 1

Mewco.— Census of 1921—14,243,852 or 43 p.c. of the inhabitants 12 years of age and over were illiterate. This report is for eight states only; the rates of illiteracy would probably be much higher for the others.

New Zealand.— Cemus of 1916 figures latest obtainable.— There is a good school system and compulsory education has been in force for many years and there is practically no illiteracy.

Poland.— la the Census of 1921, out of a population of 20,099,584 10 years of age and over, 6,581,307 or 32-74 p.c. were illiterate.

Rtissia. — Census of 1926: — >>

Cities — 758 out of every 1,000 males were literate;

626 out of every 1,000 females were literate. Villages — 524 out of every 1,000 males were literate; 274 out of every 1,000 females were hterate. For the whole Soviet Union, 567 out of every 1,000 were literate.

South Africa.— Census of Europeans, 1918 the latest available.

Population Illiterate

10 years and over No. p.c.

Total 1,043,864 12,907 1-24

Male 536,329 7,499 1 -40

Female 507,535 5,408 1-07

In regard to non-Europeans the majority of Bantu race ar? ilhterate.

Sweden.— imtersicy amongst the Swedish recruits 1925-26 was 19 or 0-05 p.c. who could not read and 51 or 0-13 p.c. who could not write.

Turkey.— Census of 1927:— Illiterate: —

87-01 p.c. of males, all ages. 96-33 p.c. of females, all ages. 91 -84 p.c. of total, all ages.

Fenezueia.- Censusof 1925:— Population Illiterate

5 years and over No. p.c.

Total 2,507,493 1,365,505 54-46

Male..... 1,222,332 654,671 53-56

Female 1,285,161 710,834 55-31

(Exclusive of Indians.)

CHAPTER III

IMPROVEMENT IN THE ILLITERACY STATUS OF CANADA WITH THE PASSING YEARS

Introduction. — As was seen in Chapter I, improvoment in illiteracy is not a single process that can be attributed directly to any one agency. Even in the older countries with homogeneous populations, the improvement in illiteracy in an interval of ten or twenty years is only accounted for in small part by the activity of the schools in that interval, although, of course, it is attribut- able to the efforts of the educational system of that country over a long period, say, a life-time. In Canada and other countries with immigrant population, improvement in illiteracy is not due wholly to the schools over any period, however long. Even if the Canadian schools eliminated illiteracy over a hfe-time, in the case of those attending them and of age to attend them, this achievement could easily be offset by an inrush of illiterate immigrants. The task of such coun- tries as Canada and the United States in batthng illiterates has been exceptionally heavy.

The foregoing remarks imply that there is no elimination of illiteracy by the direct means of teaching the illiterates to read after school age. While this assumption is not valid on a priori grounds, it is virtually sound. A few adults may be taught to read but their number in Canada must be neghgible. This is clearly brought out by Table 10 which shows that the actual iUiteracy of 1931 at each age group was no less than might be expected from that shown by persons 10 years younger in 1921. Certainly, the few adults that are taught to read are offset by those who lapse from a state of Uteracy or near illiteracy to that of total illiteracy.

Agencies at Work in Eliminating Illiteracy.— The two main agencies for the elimination of illiteracy are the schools and time. The schools eliminate by the direct means of teaching the illiterate to read; time acts in killing off the illiterates. It has been seen that the older the person, the more apt he is to be iUiterate. This, of course, is easily imderstandable since the present educational opportunities are greater than those of the past. While it is generally true in Canada it is not consistently true, for some young adult ages show more ilhteracy than older ages, or at any rate do not indicate consistent progress. This is explained by immigration and probably to a considerable extent by emigration. It is easy to see how immigration works; in the case of emigration it is less obvious. Suppose the country had no immigrants but considerable emigra- tion. Now emigration as well as immigration takes place largely at early adult ages, say, 18 to 30. These ages are much less illiterate than older ages. These persons have just been educated and, if they remained in the country to pass on to the older ages, in course of time they would infiltrate these older ages with literacy. As it is, they leave, with the result that, as time goes on, the older ages, receiving a diminished number of Uterate persons, are retarded in their progress towards literacy. Now immigration steps in with iUiterate persons (where it is not British, United States or North Western Europe) at the same ages as those who have emigrated. This should explain, then, the processes by which both immigration and emigration can work against progress in the elimination of iUiteracy.

The improvement brought about by the schools can be iUustrated in two ways. First, the improvement between 1921 and 1931. can be shown for each age group as foUows, the ages for both years being grouped as they were shown in 1921, and the data referring to aU classes of the population.

XV.— PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER AND PERCENTAGE IMPR0\T3MENT IN THE DECADE, BY BROAD AGE GROUPS, CANADA, 1931-1921

Age Group	P.C. Illiterate	Improve- ment in Decade	P.C. Improve- ment over 1921 Illiteracy
1931	1921
10-14	M2 1-64 2-87 4-88 10-96 14-27	2-01 2-80 3-93 6S0 13-15 24-32	0-89 1-16 1-06 1-62 2-19 10-05
15-20	41-4
21-34	27-0
35-64 ,• ;	24-9
	16-7
Not stated .' . "!	41-3

48

CENSUS OF CANADA; 1931

49

Now it should be clear that the activities of the schools to be credited with the improvements shown above were not the activities of the period 1921;3L The immediate activities of the school are seen only in the first group, viz., 10-14.. The decrease in illiteracy from 2-01 p.c. to 1-12 p.c. represents the improvement in the influence of the schools operating in the four years prior to 1931 over those operating in the four years prior to 1921. In the 15-20 group there is an improvement from 2-80 p.c. to 1 -64 p.c. but this is an improvement over those who were 15-20 in 1921 on the part of those who were below 15 in 1921. In other words, it was an improvement of the schools operating four years prior to 1921 over those operating from five to eleven years prior to 1921 and so on. Since the groups are too broad and uneven for measuring regular periods of time and, in any case, since the comparison of the years 1921 and 1931 does not really show what it seems to show, viz., improvement effected by the schools of the period, it is much better to take the iUiteracy of each quinquennial age group of 1931 by itself as follows: —

XVI.— PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF THE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY

QUINQUENNIAL AGE GROUPS, AND PERCENTAGE IMPROVEMENT OF EACH GROUP

OVER THE IMMEDIATELY OLDER GROUP, WITH PERCENTAGE IMMIGRANT

IN EACH GROUP, CANADA, 1931

Age Group	Percentage Illiterate	■ Improvement over Immediately Older . Age Group	Dates at Which Each Group Waa 10-14	Percentage Immi- grant in Group*
	Absolute	Percentage
10-14	M2 1-57 2-27 3-00 3-29 3-67 4-05 4-56 5-25 6-63 7-39 9-04 11-03 12-51 13-76 16-89	0-45 0-70 0-73 0-29 0-38 0-38 0-51 0-69 1-28 0-86 1-65 1-99 1-48 1-25 3-13	28-7 30-8 24-3 8-8 10-4 9-4 11-2 13-1 19-6 11-6 18-3 18-0 11-8 9-1 18-5	1927-31 1922-26 1917-21 1912-16 1907-11 1902-06 1897-1901 1892-96 1887-91 1882-86 1877-81 1872-76 1867-71 1862-66 1857-61 Before 1857
15-19
20-24
25-29	10-3
30-34
35-39	12-3
40-44
45-49	10-2 8-3 7-2 5-9 5-2 t^ 3-5 2-8 2-9
60-54
65-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79 ;
80-84
85 and over

mother than British, United States and North Western-Europe.

In the first place we notice that the first three age groups show a marked improvement, viz., from 24 to 31 p.c. reduction of illiteracy every five-year interval- since, say, 1917. These marked improvements can be definitely credited to the Canadian' schools and to improvements in these schools by way of better attendance, for even the immigrants shown in these groups were manifestly of age to attend school in Canada. The next six groups show decidedly, less improve- ment but the last column clearly indicates why. Immigrants with high percentages illiterate came in heavily at these ages. It is clear, then, that the slow improvement at the dates shown in the fourth column was not attributable to slow progress in school development in Canada. However, the exceptionally slight • progress in the case of the 1902-06 and 1887-91 groups may be significant in this respect. At both of these periods, particularly 1902-06, new portions of Canada were being opened up. At times of new settlements the organization of schools can not keep pace with the settlement. Again, the position of 1862-66 may be due to a period of rapid settlement which is known to have taken place about that time. The combined influence of rapid settlement and arrival of immigrants of the more iUiterate class, but neither one alone, can safely be assumed to be strongly causal in the want of improvement in the 1902-06 group.

It is clear that the progress from year to year due to the schools of Canada is much better shown by the case of the Canadian born, but the only age groups tabulated for these were the following three: —

Age Group	Illiterate
Canadian Born	All Classes
10-20 ;	p.c. 1-33 3-79 11-65	p.c. 1-33 3-99 10-94
21-64
65 and over

47652—4

50

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

Clearly, nothing can be made from these age groups except that the Canadian born in the first group have made an average five-yearly progress of about 0-44 p.c. since the mid-point of the second group and that the second group made an average five-yearly progress of about 0-97 p.c. since the mid-point of the third group.

One thing is clear, viz., that progress, i.e., progress directly due to the schools, in removing iUiteracy has been particularlj' marked during thelast fifteen years. That this is not reflected in that of the population at all ages is clearly attributable to something that has nothing to do with the schools of these years.

Improvement among the Different Sections of the Population. — It will have become clear by this time that the simplest and best means of showing improvement in literacy is by means of the comparative iUiteracy of the different age groups. Taking now the different sections of the population such as sex, rural and urban and provinces, and using exactly the same method of measuring improvement as in Statement XVI, we have the following: —

XVII.— PERCENTAGE nit-ROVlDMENT IN ILLITERACY OVER IMMEDIATELY OT,DER AGE GROUP, BY QUINQUENNIAL AGE GROUPS, SEX, RURAL AND URBAN, CANADA, 1931

	Mid-Date at Which Group Was 10-14	Improvement over Immediately Older Age Group
Age Group	Rural	Urban
	Males	Females	Males	Females.
10-14	1928 1923 1918 1913 1908 1903 1898 1893 1888 1883 , 1878 1873 1868 1863 1858 1856 1848 1843 1838 and earlier.	p.c. 35-9 25-8 161 11-6 7-9 8-2 13-8 11-4 19-8 111 16-2 15-9 11-4 6-3 10-9 151 19-6 46-7	p.c. 16-8 38-7 26-5 6-1 12-8 7-7 11-4 130 15-9 13-0 17-9 171 6-4 ■ 12-0 10-5 25- 1 28-2 38-3	p.c. 45- 1 43-2 43-4 12-6 8-0 101 12-8 9-8 19-5 8-3 19-0 23-4 14-8 7-8 10-9 110 29-1 46-1	p.c. 47-6
15-19	45-2
20-24	26-3
25-29	49
30-34	16-8
35-39	12-1
40-44	13-2
45-49	0-9
50-54	17-5
55-59	12-5
60-64	22-3
65-69	18-0
70-74	15-7
75-79	11-6
80-84 . .	8-2
85-89	17-1
90-94	41-5
95-99	37-6

In comparing the progress by rural and urban it should be made clear at the outset that these figures do not refer to the rates of progress by rural and urban as such but of the persons who were in rural or urban residence in 1931. These urban residents in 1931 may have been in rural residence when at school age. The comparison is really a population class comparison, not a rural and urban comparison at all. Consequently, it is very difficult to explain some of the peculiarities in the rates of progress because their causes are so complex, e.g., the low rate of both male and female urban of persons who were of school age around 1893. This may have several causes, one of which may be the coming into existence of urban corporations in illiterate parts of the country around that year. This is similar to saying that persons passed from rural to urban residence, except that in the illustration given they move in at all ages whereas in an ordin- ary trek they move in only at certain ages, particularly those between 18 and 30. A period of rapid urban increase is generally due to a movement into urban residence from rural parts or abroad and this could easily increase urban illiteracy. Similarly, a period of very slow urban decrease would result in a great improvement in urban literacy. In view of this it will be interesting to examine the periods of slow progress in urban male illiteracy synchronizing with fairly rapid progress in rural male iUiteracy especially around 1888, 1883 and 1868; strangely enough the opposite held true of the 1868 females. However, it would be a fruitless task to assign causes to the irregularities in the rate of progress, but an examination of the general trends is well worth while. The urban progress has been greater than the rural progress and the female slightly greater than the male. The period Of greatest progress has evidently been the last fifteen years or since about 1918; of the slowest pro- gress, the preceding fifteen years or, say, from the beginning of the century tiU about 1918. This reasonably coincides with rapid settlement and generally would apply to urban as well as rural, for not only were the urban centres receiving immigrants in those days, but Canadian born who

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 51

were of school age under pioneering conditions have since moved into urban centres. To this general observation may be added that both rural and urban females who were of school age in 1913 and the rural females of 1868 showed strikingly slow progress, the same being true of the males who were of school age in 1908, 1903, 1893, 1868 and 1863, while 1868 was low .for all classes alike. The significance of these last dates is difficult to interpret definitely. One can only sur- mise. There is great significance in the fact that the rate of progress in the last fifteen years has been greater than at any previous period because this is contrary to expectations. When a quan- tity like an illiteracy percentage is being worn down by time, it is customary to find large portions taken off at the beginning, these portions becoming smaller and smaller as time goes on and as the quantity becomes small with the result that it never completely disappears; in the case of illiteracy as shown in the above statement the wearing-down process has been stronger at the latter end than ever before. A process like this renders po.ssible an ultimate almost complete elimination of illiteracy. More remarkable still, the later rates of diminution have been greatest in the urban population where the illiteracy percentage was already small. This behaviour is probably so rare a statistical phenomenon that it may be worth while investigating further. .

Table 8 shows, arranged in intervals and ascending order of size, illiteracy percentages taken . from the different age groups, male and female, rural and urban, in the nine prov- inces— 500 different percentages. Opposite each interval of percentages illiterate are the per- centages of improvement in a five-year period. As before, the period elapsing between one age group and the next younger is taken as representing a five-year difference in the dates at which these persons were of school age. This, of course, is absolutely correct, except that it must be remembered that the persons who were of school age at these different dates were not necessarily attending school or attending school in Canada.

It is clear from even the appearance of the table that there is no connection between the stage of illiteracy reached and the improvement in the next five years. Consequently it is clear that the accelerating diminution of ilhteracy mentioned above refers only to the last fifteen years before 1931, or since 1916, which may, so far as Canada is concerned, be considered a period of exceptional educational activity. The testimony of the figures is borne out by the educational history of the period. In the first place the period of very rapid settlement was over and the newest provinces and the new parts of older provinces had had time to build schools. In the next place compulsory school attendance laws were enacted and put into force by means of school attendance officers, etc. Tho.se provinces that still have no compulsory attendance acts were caught by the spirit of the times and spurred up school attendance by moral rather than legal persuasion. The spirit of the times was very articulate in teachers' associations, in the press and elsewhere.

Although we now see that illiteracy is not really diminishing with accelerating speed, it is still remarkable that its diminution has not shown a slowing up. This is contrary to expectations. Why should an urban population which has now a low percentage illiterate show as much progress in the next few years as a place which has a high percentage, when it should be much easier to wear down a high percentage than a low? The explanation would seem to involve not only the question of .immigration and emigration but also a point which was dealt with in Chapter I, viz., segregation, i.e., the tendency for illiterates to drift into an illiterate rather than a literate community or age group. The immigrants come in in certain age groups; the more illiterate of them settle where there are other illiterates and so on. No doubt occupation type is partly responsible for this. The ultimate effect of it may be that the ages from which at present illiteracy is being rapidly eliminated will have a tendency to pick up some ilhterates from outside as they advance but this is less likely to happen where the elimination is practically complete than where it has proceeded more slowly.

Since illiteracy is thus decreasing with age, down to age 10-14, at an undiminishing rate and since the ages manifestly mark off the dates at which each group was of school age, it follows the population at all ages will show a decrease in illiteracy proportional to the extent to which the persons, now in the older ages, are removed by death and replaced by the younger ages. This, of course, provided that no foreign elements with higher percentages of illiteracy are injected. Merely as a matter of interest, the present population 10 years of age and over is shown as it will appear, say, ton years from 1931 by showing the survivors at each age group by means of a life table and assuming (what will presently be shown to be highly probable) that each age retains its present percentage illiterate for the next ten years. 47652—44

52

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

XVIII.— POPULATION WITH PROBABLE SURVIVORS AND PROBABLE NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE ILLITERATE IN 1941, BY QUINQUENNIAL AGE GROUPS, CANADA, 1931

Age Group	Population, 1931 •	Probable Survivors, 1941	Probable Illiterates, 1941
No.	P.O.
10-14	1,074,051 1,039,591 911,185 786,281 708,836 688,463 646,099 585,211 488,681 367,025 294,697 231,134 171,600 98,629 49,171 19,129 4,932 1,073 163	1,042,182 1,112,380 1,048,274 1,008,403 883,800 757,976 679,065 652,145 600,972 528,446 420,206 289,950 206.218 134,982 73,788 24,655 5,990 1,148 170	11,672 12,458 11,781 15,832 20,062 22, 740 22,341 23,934 24.339 24.097 22,061 18,934 16,240 12.202 8,139 3,082 824 177 32	M2
15-19	1-12
20-24	1-12
25-29	1-57
30-34	2-27
35-39	300
40-44	3-29
45-49	3-67
50-54	4-05
55-69	4-66
60-64	6-25
66-69	6-53
70-74	7-39
75-79	9-04
80-84	11-03
86-89	12-50
90-94	13-76
95-99	15-42
	18-82
	8,166,851	9,470,749	269,947	2-85

^Stated ages only.

This means that if the schools in the ten years between 1931 and 1941 continue to do as well as they did in the five j'ears prior to 1931 and if there is no injection of an illiterate immigrant element in the interval, the number illiterate in Canada should decrease from 309,000 to 270,000 by 1941 and the percentage illiterate from 3-79 to 2-85, an improvement of 25 p.c. in ten years brought about solely by age displacement. This draws attention to the great importance of this age displacement as an agent in removing illiteracy, from which follows that no matter how well the schools do, -it is necessary to await this displacement before illiteracy is eliminated. It also follows that this ehmination will be slower if the birth rate and death rate continue to go down.

Changes in Illiteracy between 1921 and 1931. — It should be clear now that a comparison between 1931 and 1921 does not represent the measure of the educational activities of the interval, but a combination of these, age displacement, the results of immigration and emigration and probably other fg,ctors. Thus it should be clear at the outset that the ages 20-24 in 1931 should not be compared with the same ages in 1921 but with the age group 10-14. With this in mind. Table 9 showing the illiteracy age for age in these two censuses should be interesting. The evi- dence of this table would lead to the conclusion that a retrograde progress was made in the interval. Thus the percentage ilhterate at 20-24 in 1931 was 2-27 whereas that of the 10-14 in 1921 was 2-03; 25-29 was 3-00 in 1931 whereas 15-19 was 2-75 in 1921 and so on. If we relied solely on this evidence we would conclude that a certain amount of the progress made in the schools is lost in the next ten 3'ears, but this seeming retrogression could easily be due to theinflux of an illiterate element in the interval.

Indications of Improvement or Retrogression after Passing Scliool Age. — Now it is

an important point to settle — ^whether, after school age is passed, there are indications of im-r provement or retrogression in illiteracy. An attempt was made to examine this point. The population of 1921 was scaled in quinquennial groups from five years upwards. The expected survivors of each age of this population in 1931 were then calculated from a hfe table. Of course the .1921 population at 5-9 would be 15-19 in 1931 and so on. The illiteracy of each age group in 1921 was assumed to be the illiteracy of their survivors ten years older in 1931. This would correspond with the actual illiteracy of each group in 1931 if there were no improvement or retrogression. The actual illiteracy in 1931 is shown in Table 10 against the expected illiteracy. The first group, i.e., those who were 5-9 in 1921, had a percentage illiteracy of 35 • 67 in 1921 and 1 • 57 in 1931. All, or nearly all, of this improvement was effected by the schools in the interval. It would seem from this that before the age of 10, the illiteracy of the population is reduced from total illiteracy to 35-67 p.c, i.e., 64-33 p.c. of the population is made literate. In the next ten years this 35-67 is reduced to 1-57, i.e., another 34-10 p.c. are rendered hterate. The population is

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931 53

now past school age. After this age there is no evidence of a further reduction of illiteracy; on the contrary there are as many indications of retrogression as of advancement. The. result is that for all ages the actual percentage illiterate is almost exactly the same as the expected per- centage, viz., 4 • 64 as compared with 4 ■ 68. There are many points in tlw table which are difficult to understand. The actual ilhteracy at the older ages, i.e., over 50 years of age is worse than expected ; between 30 and 49 it is better than expected and Between 20 and 29 it is again worse than expected. Tt is true that there was a large element of new population between the ages of 20 and 29, the age at which outward and inward movement of the population is heaviest. The figures show an expected population at this age of 1,675,628 as compared with an actual of 1,698,252 but this docs not tell the whole story. There are evidences of heavy emigration in the early part of the decade and this emigration would be largely from the 20-24 age group resulting in a heavy dis- placement in the population 25-29 by 1931. The figures of the census of years of arrival of the immigrant population are shown in Table 11.

From Table ,11. we find that ages 20-29 contained oyer 238,000 of a new element whose illit- eracy was not included in the illiteracy expected from the 1921 population. Incidentally the im- migrant arrivals throughout the whole range of ages illustrate one of the reasons why the expected and actual illiteracy are different. As to the retrogressive condition of the Canadian population 50 years of age and over, there is no certain explanation, merely conjecture. It is possible, of course, that there was a lapse from literacy to ilhteracy on the part of the same persons, but this is only surmise. There are also possibilities that the ages arc not accurately stated, e.g., that the person who gave the ago of 40 in 1921 did not give the age of 50 in 1931. The effect of this, however, would be the opposite of what is shown in Table 10, for it is well-known that up to, say, the age of 40, there is a tendency to under-state the age and after the age of, say, 65, to over- state the age. Now if persons who gave any age between 30 and 34 in 1921 gave an age between 35 and 39 in 1931 instead of the correct age, this would tend to show this age group more illiterate than it actually was because it really contained older and hence more illiterate persons than it seemed to contain. But the table shows persons 35-39 as less illiterate than expected. On the other hand if persons 60-64 in 1921 showed 75-79 instead of 70-74 in 1931, this would tend to make the group 75-79 less illiterate than it actually was because it contained a younger or less illiterate group. The table, however, shows the age 75-79 as more illiterate than expected. Again, it is possible that the literate persons state their age accurately while the illiterate persons, being unfamiliar with numbers, state it inaccurately, but we have evidence that this is not probable. The tendency to round numbers instead of exact numbers is nearly as prevalent among the educated as the unedu- cated. This leaves us' with the phenomenon of the person 30-49 being less and those over 50 being more illiterate than expected, further from explanation than ever. It is not likely immigra- tion and it is not likely age mis-statement. The ideas of genuine self-improvement in the case of the persons 30-49 and a genuine lapse in that of those 50 and over are inacceptable. It may be a spurious improvement and lapse, i.e., the persons 30-49 may have been boasting and the older persons self-depreciating. This is probable. That persons aged 20-29 are not similarly inclined to boast may be hidden by the fact that this age group contains so many new-comers who are genuinely illiterate.

Improvement in Illiteracy in the Different Provinces, 1921-1931. — The improvement in illiteracy in the ten years in the different provinces is shown in Table 12, by sex and such com- parable age grouping as was available from the manner of tabulation of the material.

It will be seen that, generally speaking, a marked improvement pervaded all the age groups' in all the provinces. There were strange lapses between 15 and 34 among the females of Prince Edward Island and at ages 20-34 and 65 and over among the males of New Brunswick. It is also remarkable that New Brunswick which showed the greatest illiteracy in 1921 showed next to the least degree of improvement. The improvement in the four western provinces is striking. The fact, that it was greater among females than males is at least partly due to the higher per- centages illiterate among females than males in 1921. The foreign females in these provinces ire more rapidly finding the level of females throughout Canada. With the same degree of improvement in the next ten years, illiteracy in these provinces would be practically negligible by 1941. The same is true of the females of Quebec. Speculation like this may be useless but none the less interesting. If in the next twenty years the improvement continued to be as great as between 1921 and 1931 the percentage illiterate in each province would be as folbws: —

54

XIX.-

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

-ESTIMATED ILLITERACY RATE, BY SEX, FOR THE PROVINCES OF CANADA, 1951 IF THE PERCENTAGE RATE OF IMPROVEMENT OF 1921-1931 CONTINUED TO OBTAIN

Province	Estimated Illiteracy Rate, 1951	Improvement in Illiteracy between 1921 and 1931
*	Males	Females	Males	Females
Prince Edward Island	p.C. 2-13 3-54 7-77 2-95 0-97 Nil 0-98 Nil Nil	p.C. 1-41 1-50 311 0-79 0-93 Nil Nil Nil 0-27	P.O. 13-45 12-30 5-30 20-79 24-30 37-50 26-80 33-98 38-80	p.C. 14-90 22-44 15-70 27-53 20-09 30-70 33-02 33-01 31-66
Nova Scotia
New Brunswick
Quebec
Alberta '
British Columbia

trend.

Of course it is not expected that the above will happen but it is interesting as showing the

IMPROVEMENT IN 1921-1931 AMONG DIFFERENT CLASSES OF THE

POPULATION

Rural and Urban, Male and Female. — It is, of course, important, to know what classes of the population show the greatest improvement. In the first place we compare the rural and urban residents. This, again, is not so much a matter of comparing places as comparing classes of people, for there are considerable differences in the class composition of the rural and urban populations. Not only are greater difficulties experienced in providing school accommodation in rural than in urban, but more illiterate classes are apt to settle in rural districts from abroad or the literate are more'apt to leave the rural for the urban. In the comparison shown below, all ages 10 and over are used instead of age groups. It will be clear by this time that the com- parison by all ages instead of by individual groups is a complex of many things which could be better analysed by comparing group with group than 1921 with 1931. Table 13 is a summary of all these conditions and further conditions which have not yet been examined, viz., the Canadian born, the British born and the foreign born. ,

The number of cases in which urban illiteracy increased between 1921 and 1931 is unexpect- edly large. No doubt part of this is due to the movement of the rural population to urban resi- ■ dence in the period. It will be noticed, however, that, for Canada as a whole, rural and urban illiteracy in the case of both males and females showed decided decreases. The illiteracy of the whole population decreased from 5-10 in 1921 to 3-79 in 1931 or 1-31 points. It is interesting to see how much of this decrease was due to the change in the distribution of the population as between rural and urban and males and females. With the illiteracy of 1931 in each class and the proportion rural and urban, males and females of 1921, the general illiteracy of 1931 would have been 3 • 92 p.c, i.e., illiteracy in the ten years decreased (5 • 10— 3 • 92) or 1 • 18 p.c. by virtue of the decrease in illiteracy of each class. This leaves 0-13 p.c. or one-tenth of the total decrease as due to a more urban and more female population. This is unimportant and it is easily seen that by far the more important element in the improvement is the lowering of illiteracy within the rural and urban and male and female classes. This is seen particularly in the Prairie Provinces. The importance of age as a factor in the improvernent in these classes is so obvious that it is not worth while measuring it.

Canadian, British and Foreign Born. — One of the most important aspects of the illiteracy situation, as discussed in Chapter I, was the potentiahty of elimination through the agency of segregation. Already in the present chapter it has been seen how the segregation by ages has led to improvement not only in the decade but over many years. There is a further segregation by race, and especially by birthplace. The iUiteracy imported from abroad was seen in Chapter I to be the greatest single element in the illiteracy of Canada. The principal method by which the race and birthplace segregation can be eliminated is by the displacement of the foreign born of illiterate peoples by Canadian born. Table 13 shows the extent to which this has been carried out in the decade.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

55

If, for the sake of illustration, we take the males in all Canada, it is easily seen that if there were a larger proportion of Canadian and British in 1931 than in 1921, this would automatically reduce the illiteracy for all males. The comparative rural male populations 10. years of age and over were as follows: —

XX— NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF THE RURAL MALE POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER AND PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE, BY NATIVITY, CANADA, 1931 AND 1921

	Rural Male Population 10 Years	md over
Nativity	Population in Class	P.O. ■ of Total	P.O. Illiterate
	1931	1921	1931	1921	1931	1921
TOTAL	2.025,105 1,492,294 215,264 317,647	I,793,7S.S 1,309,164 205,450 . 279,168	100 00 73-69 10-63 15-68	100-00 72-98 11-46 15-56	6-10 6-41 0-72 8-29	7-72
	7-99
	1-00
	11-44

If the distribution as between nativity classes had remained the same in 1931 as in 1921, each class having the illiteracy of 1931, the illiteracy of all classes would have been 6-05 p.c. instead of 6 • 10 p.c. Thus the proportions of the three classes were more unfavourable in 1931 than in 1921 and the improvement was entirely due to the improvement within the classes themselves.

Races. — As already mentioned, race is the predominant factor in Canadian illiteracy. Table 14 shows the illiteracy of persons 10 years of age and over by racial origin in 1931 and 1921. It is particularly illuminating because it also divides each race into British (Canadian and other British) and foreign born.

It is seen in this table that out of 272,796 illiterates (exclusive of Indians in the Yukon and Northwest Territories) only 38,731 or less than one-seventh were British races. If we take together the British, Scandinavians and Dutch, we have only 43,175 or less than 16 p.c. of the illiterates although they comprise over 58 p.c. of the population lOyears of age and over. In this table the nativity classes are only two, viz., British (including Canadian) and foreign born. In the case of all races except the British themselves, the French and the Negroes, the illiteracy of the foreign born was greater than of the British born. In the case of almost every race there was decided improvement between 1921 and 1931, the exceptions being the foreign-born British races and Dutch, the unspecified European and Asiatic races and the unspecified of all races. There is no great significance in the lapses of the unspecified groups as it is not certain whether they included the same races in 1921 and 1931. This refers only to both sexes. In the case of males there were lapses also among the Czechs and Slovaks and the foreign-born Dutch and Norwegians and the foreign-born Negroes. The lapse among the unspecified Asiatic races was very great, but this may be due to change in classification. The females of the different races were much freer from lapses than the males. The improvement among the foreign-bom females of European races was greater than among the males. It would be interesting to measure the improvement or the con- trary to the general illiteracy due to changes in racial distribution, but it seems hardly worth while making this calculation, especially as this improvement is tangled up with sex, nativity and age distribution. What seems of importance is that the improvement was so general. Taking all races the difference between the British- and foreign-born (rates of) illiteracy decreased from 8-75 p.c. in 1921 to 6-05 p.c. in 1931; in the case of European races from 7-28 p.c. to 4-45 p.c; in the case of the Asiatic races, from 24-79 p.c. to 13-58 p.c. This is another direction of improve- ment. The more illiterate foreigners are catching up to the less illiterate British, although they have as yet a long way to go. One is impressed by the numerous ways in which illiteracy is being reduced. However, the possibility must not be lost sight of that the greater fertility of non- British races may bring about a retrograde condition in the population as a whole before these races have caught up to the British in the matter of literacy. It is doubtful that the racial dis- tribution was in this respect as favourable in 1931 as in 1921.

Population from Various Countries of Birth. — No tabulation of illiteracy by birthplace was made in 1921; consequently, in Table 15, to make a comparison between 1921 and 1931, the illiteracy of the foreign born of the race corresponding to each birthplace is shown as well as the illiteracy by the actual coutitry of birth in 1931. This, of course, is not an exact means of comparison but it is interesting.

56

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

The table is somewhat of a miscellany since it takes in the illiteracy of the provinces of birth in 1931 with no corresponding figures for 1921. It is interesting to compare the illiteracy of the Canadian born living in the different provinces with that of the persons born in these provinces, some of whom live elsewhere in Canada as follows: —

XXI.-PERCENTAGES ILLITERATE OF THE CANADIAN-BORN POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE

AND OraR LIVING IN THE PROVINCES COMPARED WITH THE SAME PERCENTAGES

BORN IN THE PROVINCES, CANADA, 1031

Province

Prince Edward Island

Nova Scotia

New Brimswicli

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Saskatchewan

Alberta

British Columbia

P.O. Illiterate ot

Canadian Born

10 Years and over

Living in Province

2-62

413

7-14

4

1-93

2-50

2-41

2-73

3-87

Born in Province-

2-46 3-78 6-59 5-05 1-60 2-49 2.92 3-54 6-19

East of Saskatchewan it is evident that those moving out of the provinces are much less illiterate than those remaining; west of Manitoba the contrary holds. Age distribution and industry have, no doubt, a great deal to do with this phenomenon. As for other countries of birth, the comparison between 1921 and 1931 is so indirect that it has general interest only. Still, most of the foreign born of the various races (certain races excepted) are from the corresponding country ot birth. However, the improvement shown in the table may be largely due to the schools of Canada, since the figures include persons of school age.

Nativity of Parents and Illiteracy.— A short statement on this point is all that is war- ranted by the data in as much as the illiteracy of Canadian born of Canadian-born parents is raised unnaturally by including Indians.

Percentage illiterate 10 years and over in 1931 of the Canadian born with: —

Both parents Canadian born 4. 51

Both parents British born 0-76

Both parents foreign born 1-58

Father Canadian, mother British 0-73

Father Canadian, mother foreign 1-56

Father British, mother Canadian 0-94

Father. British, mother foreign 0-70

Father foreign, mother Canadian 1-95

Father foreign, mother British 0-79

Parentage not stated 17-83

It will be noticed, that the British, pure or mixed, lower the illiteracy in every case while the Canadian raise it.

Improvement by Geographical Areas. — The smallest geographical areas for which illit- eracy data were tabulated were the counties and individual cities and towns. For the counties we have illiteracy for all classes 10 years of age and over as shown in Table 16 with the exception of British Columbia, the area of whose census divisions was not comparable in 1921 and 1931. State- ment XXII is a summary of the illiteracy of the counties for rural parts only. This summary arranges the 205 counties of 1921 and 209 of 1931 in iUiteracy classes and shows the number of coun- ties in each class in 1921 with the percentage iUiterate and the percentage illiterate of the same, counties in 1931. The number of counties in the same class in 1931 with the percentage illiterate in 1931 and 1921 is also shown. The summary shows not only the improvement in the decade but also how far segregation of illiteracy has proceeded.

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

57

XXII.— PERCENTAGES ILUTER.-\TE OF THE RURAL POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, CANADA (EXCLUSIVE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA), BY COUNTIES OR CENSUS DIVISIONS,

1931 AND 1921

Intervals of Pcrcent.ige Illiteracy	No. of Counties, 1931	Average Illiteracy, 1931	Average Illiteracy, Same Counties, 1921	No. of Counties, 1921	A verage Illiteracy, 1921	Average Illiteracy, Same Counties, 1931
Less than Ip.c	7 32 30 17! 17 24' 21 18 = 13 6 2 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 1	p.c. 0-79 1-46 2-52 3-47 4-50 5-50 6-31 7-43 8-37 9-42 10-26 11-38 12-66 13-60 14-26 15-54 17-34 18-19 19-94 20-23 21-95 24-53 51-96	p.c. 0-92 1-64 3-43 4-53 5-33 6-62 8-43 9-96 11-54 11-60 11-60 16-20 19-72 17-21 21-47 25-74 18-06 36-29 23-21 1 49-04 24-28 58-26	7 25 27 15 21 12 16 13 10 13 10 7 4 1 4 2 4 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1	P.O. 0-85 1-47 2-44 3-62 4-63 6-67 6-57 7-53 8-43 9-62 10-27 11-26 12-51 13-55 15-42 16-60 17-36 18-27 19-72 . 21-22 23-21 24-28 25-26 36-29 49-04 58-26	p.c. 0.86
	1-37
2 3	2-29
3 " " " 4	3-17
4 " " " 5	3-71
5 " " " 6 . . '.	4-80
6 " " " 7	6-69
7 " " " 8	6-52
8 " " " 9	6-81
9 " " " 10	7-37
10 " " " 11	6-86
11 " " " 12	8-50
12 " " " 13	8-35
13 ' 14	6-07
14 " " " 16
15 " " " 16	11-98
16 " " '■ 17	9-05
17 " " " 18	13-77
18 19	11-89
19 " " " 20 20 " " " 21	12-66
21 " " " 22	16-42
23 " " " 24 .	19-94
24 " " " 25	24-63
25 " " " 26 36 " " " 37	14-38 18-19
49 " " " 50	21-95
51 " " " 52
6S " " ■• 59	51-96

iNot shown in 1921.

'Montreal and Jesus Islands are shown combined l\ere for purposes of comparison with 1921; elsewhere shown separately.

First as to the facts of improvement in the rural population : in all classes there was a marked improvement in the ten years, county for county, except the class which had less than 1 p.c. illiterate in 1921. In the 7 counties in this class there was a slight rise, but in the 7 counties which had less than 1 p.c. illiterate in 1931 there was a definite improvement. The number of counties with more than the present percentage illiterate in Canada (3-79 for Canada as a whole) were reduced from 131 in 1921 to 123 in 1931 and those with less than the present illiteracy increased from 74 in 1921 to 86 in 1931, i.e., 12 counties or census divisions were added to the low ilhteracy class. The number of counties with 10 p.c. illiterate or more were reduced from 46 in 1921 to 24 in 1931, an improvement of almost 50 p.c. The number with an illiteracy rate of 20 p.c. or more was reduced from 9 in 1921 to 5 in 1931. Thus geographically a very appreciable improve- ment was effected.

The segregation of illiteracy in the interval can be illustrated by a chart showing how the illiteracy above the average was crowded into fewer counties in 1931 than in 1921. From Chart 7 it appears that the greatest 'change took place in counties with 10 p.c. illiterate and over. It is clear, liowever, that even in 1931 illiteracy was rather widespread geographically, for 123 out of the 209 shown had more than the average illiteracy.

The urban illiteracy rates for cities of 30,000 and over — for the population as a whole and for the Canadian bom — are shown in Table 17.

Comparison of Immigrants of Various Years of Arrival. — A comparison between the immigrants arriving at different years is misleading because the earlier immigrants are now older and ipsojacip moreJUiterate than the later ones. Accordingly a correction must be made for this error before the comparison is adequate. Statement XXIII is first shown in its crude state before such corrections are made. It will be seen that in the case of the British born there are no marked diilerences in the different arrivals except in the case of those arriving before 1901, all of whom would be over 30 years of age in 1931. In the case of the foreign born there would seem to be a tendency for the more recent arrivals to be more illiterate than the earlier, except, of course, the pre-1901 arrivals. However, this cannot be decided until a correction has been made.

58

CENSUS OF CANADA, 1931

Chart 7

XXIII.— NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE ILLITERATE OF THE IMMIGRANT POPULATION 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY NATIVITY, YEAR OF IMMIGRATION AND SEX, CANADA!, 1931

		Illiterates 10 Years of Age and	over
Year ot Immigration	Total Immigrant	British Borni	Foreign Born
	No.	P.O.	No.	P.O.	No.	P.C.
	98,712 22,143 7,746 4,062 18,901 28,627 16,360 873 52,938 13,014 3,344 2,214 10,372 15,129 8,304 561 45.774 9,129 4,402 1,848 8,529 13,498 8,056 312	4-42 5-61 2-91 2-07 3-98 4-57 6-38 11-17 4-21 5-36 2-34 2-42 4-02 4-06 5'70 13-15 4-71 5-75 3-57 1-76 3-93 5-32 7-28 8-80	6,714 682 568 496 986 1,642 2,167 173 3.734 390 291 236 , 501 970 1,252 94 2,980 292 277 260 485 672 916 79	0-57 0-45 0-38 0-42 0-37 0-49 1-52 4-17 0-60 0-46 0-39 0-48 0-37 0-49 1-53 4-21 0-55 0-43 0-38 0-38 0-36 0-49 1-51 4-12	91,998 21,461 7,178 3,566 17,915 26,985 14,193 700 . 49.204 12,624 3,053 1,978