Statistics Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada
Warning View the most recent version.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

More information on Major field of study

Census:

2006 (1/5 sample)1, 2001 (1/5 sample), 1996 (1/5 sample), 1991 (1/5 sample), 1986 (1/5 sample)

Information on the historical comparability of the 2006 variable Major Field of Study, classified under MFS with previous censuses, can be found in the Education Reference Guide, 2006 Census.

Reported for:

Population 15 years of age and over with a postsecondary certificate, diploma or degree, excluding institutional residents and employees

Question number:

Coded variable: Question 30

Responses:

See Appendix M for the classification structure.

Remarks:

The classification structure of the variable Major Field of Study can be used either independently or in conjunction with the Highest certificate, diploma or degree variable. When the latter is used with Major Field of Study, it should be noted that each of the postsecondary qualifications ranging from the trades certificate or diploma to the earned doctorate displays a differing pattern or distribution.

Note:

  1. The 2006 major field of study variable data classified under the Major Field of Study (MFS) were not available at the time of the education release on March 4, 2008. They were released on June 12, 2009 and are available as a custom request through Statistics Canada's National Contact Centre.

    For the first time with the 2006 Census, major field of study data were coded according to the Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP), Canada 2000. The major field of study data in the 2006 Census were also recoded using the MFS classification that was used prior to the 2006 Census. Future censuses will present information coded to the CIP only.

    It is recommended that users not make historical comparisons between categories of the two classification systems on the basis of their labels. Even though some entries in the two classifications are similar, direct comparison would be inappropriate, given the much more detailed character of the new classification.

    Empirical MFS-CIP concordance tables have been produced to allow field of study comparisons over time. This is done either by recoding 2006 data with the MFS Classification, or previous censuses with the CIP Canada 2000 Classification. For more information on the CIP Canada 2000 – Major Field of Study empirical concordance tables, please see Appendix S and Appendix T in the 2006 Census Dictionary.

    Changes to the major field of study question in the 2006 questionnaire included the addition of text requesting that respondents 'Please be specific' when reporting their major field of study, and the use of a new set of examples of typical fields of study. The general impacts of these changes in 2006 were: (a) to increase the tendency of respondents to provide specific branches of a particular field of study (e.g., 'marine engineering' or 'power engineering' instead of 'engineering'), (b) to lessen the tendency to respond using a former 2001 write-in example and, conversely, (c) to increase the tendency to respond using one of the new 2006 write-in examples. These changes should be kept in mind when making comparisons to previous years using the disaggregated 'unit' levels of the 'major field of study' variable (classified to MFS).

    Users will note that 'M482 No specialization' was dropped from the 2006 dissemination codeset. The large majority of these responses were recoded as 'M120 Humanities – General Arts,' with minor amounts assigned to 'M187 Social sciences and related, n.e.c. – Other' and other categories.

    Users who select both MFS and CIP classifications for 2006 in their tables can expect to encounter small counts in MFS-CIP pairings of dissimilar fields of study. Such pairings are due to: (a) differing coding interpretations under the two classification systems of insufficiently specific write-ins, (b) differing strategies between classifications for the coding of joint major or multiple fields of study, (c) the use of separate data processing environments for CIP and MFS codes, (d) an acceptable level of coding error.

    For more information on the Major Field of Study classification, please refer to Major Field of Study (MFS).