Section 1: Context and survey information

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.

Section 1.1 Survey objectives and information needs
Section 1.2 Conducting the survey and defining the sample
Section 1.3 Sample composition and themes of the main modules of the Survey on the Vitality of Official-language Minorities
Section 1.4 Potential and limitations of the Survey on the Vitality of Official-language Minorities
References
Notes

In the spring of 2003, the Canadian government unveiled an Action Plan for Official Languages. This five-year plan sets forth a number of specific objectives in areas that are seen as top priorities by official language minorities: education, community development and an exemplary public service. The Action Plan's objectives are intended to enhance the vitality of the English and French linguistic minorities and to support and assist their development.

To obtain an overview of the current situation of Francophone and Anglophone minorities in areas such as the family, education, health, early childhood and language of use in public life, a partnership was established among a number of federal departments and agencies1 covered by the objectives of the Action Plan in order to fund the implementation of a post-censal survey2. This is the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities (SVOLM), which specifically focuses on French-speakers outside Quebec and English-speakers in Quebec.

The survey data provide a deeper understanding of the current situation of individuals who belong to these groups, on subjects as varied as instruction in the minority language, access to different services in that language (e.g., health care), and language practices in daily activities both at home and outside the home.

Section 1.1 Survey objectives and information needs

The survey has two main objectives. First, it collects information about areas that are top priorities for official-language minority communities such as education, health and justice. Second, it produces information that will assist various departments and agencies in policy development and program implementation. Moreover, the database thus produced allows researchers in the government, university and private sectors to investigate issues that they identify with regard to official language minorities.

The information collected by the survey not only sheds light on the situation of official language minorities relative to their demographic, social, economic and cultural capital, but also offers a better understanding of their language practices and experience. Thus, using this database will improve our understanding of the linguistic trajectory of members of official-language minority communities from early childhood to adulthood, the language dynamics in exogamous families, the motivations behind parents' transmission of their mother tongue to their children and their choice of a school system. The database also yields statistics on aspects of language use in the public sphere, such as minority language access to health care and government services and the use of languages in businesses, professional and non-professional associations and the workplace. These statistics will provide information about whether members of official-language minority communities are able to live their lives in the minority language.

Section 1.2 Conducting the survey3 and defining the sample

Data collection for the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities (SVOLM) took place from October 2006 to January 2007, nearly six months after the 2006 Census. It consisted of a telephone interview lasting approximately 40 minutes, using computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) techniques. Interviews were conducted in English or French, depending on the respondent's choice4.

The survey respondents were selected from the sample of persons from the one out of five households who had completed the long questionnaire in the 2006 Census5. Respondent selection was based on answers to the questions on mother tongue, knowledge of official languages and language spoken most often at home. This ensured that the survey covered all the people considered to belong to official language minorities. The criteria used in the SVOLM for selecting the sample are as follows:

  1. French speakers outside Quebec
  1. Those who have French as their mother tongue, alone or with another language;
  2. Those whose mother tongue is a non-official language (referred to in this report as allophones) and who, of the two official languages, know only French;
  3. Those whose mother tongue is a non-official language, who know both French and English, and who speak either a non-official language or French, alone or with another language, most often at home.
  • English speakers in Quebec
    1. Those who have English as their mother tongue, alone or with another language;
    2. Those whose mother tongue is a non-official language and who, of the two official languages, knew only English;
    3. Those whose mother tongue is a non-official language, who know both English and French, and who speak either a non-official language or English, alone or with another language, most often at home.

    For historical reasons, the mother tongue criterion is often used to designate Canada's Francophone and Anglophone populations. Not only do statistics based on this criterion have the advantage of being approximately comparable for more than half a century, but section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982 uses it as one of the conditions entitling parents to send their children to elementary or secondary school in the minority language. However, shifts that have taken place over the years in the composition of Canada's population are likely to lead to a redefinition or expansion of the concept of Francophone or Anglophone group or community, since a significant number of people whose mother tongue is neither French nor English use one or both of these languages predominantly or commonly in their daily life.

    Accordingly, it has been suggested that a definition of official language minorities be adopted that takes this reality into account. Of course, the SVOLM data distinguish between individuals according to their mother tongue, but to avoid any possible confusion, this report uses the terms "English-speaking population" or "English speaker" and "French-speaking population" or "French speaker" to designate the official language minorities in Quebec and those outside of Quebec, respectively.

    Section 1.3 Sample composition and themes of the main modules of the Survey on the Vitality of Official-language Minorities

    The survey has two universes: 1) adults aged 18 and over, and 2) children under 18 years of age whose parent (who is the respondent) belongs to the official language minority. Accordingly, two samples were drawn. The response rates obtained were 70.5% for the adult sample and 76.1% for the child sample. The two final databases contain a) 20,067 adults and b) 15,550 children. The size of the samples takes into account the fact that official language minority communities are distinct from one province to another, but also from one region to another within the same province. The situations facing them differ depending on whether they are concentrated or dispersed over the geographic area. Appendix B shows the breakdown of the sample and the target population among the provinces, territories and regions for which reliable estimates could be obtained6.

    Also, in Quebec, in light of the particular situation of allophones in the Montreal census metropolitan area and the strong competition that exists there between French and English, a sample of allophones with French as their first official language spoken was added to the sample of allophones with English as their first official language spoken. This should make it possible to gain a better understanding of their linguistic orientation. However, in light of the purpose of this report, that sub-sample is not included in the statistics presented here7.

    The content of the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities (SVOLM) questionnaire reflects the information needs of a certain number of federal partners. It was determined based on the results of a series of qualitative tests and a pilot survey. The pilot survey was used to evaluate the wording of the questions, the consistency among them and the format of the questionnaire, as well as the procedures for capturing the computer-assisted telephone interview.

    The survey contained a series of modules on various themes. A common part of the questionnaire collected demographic, linguistic and cultural information about the respondent and, where applicable, the child, as well as members of the household. These modules concerned the respondent's language proficiency, education, linguistic trajectory from childhood to adulthood and sense of belonging, as well as perceived subjective vitality, economic activity and income.

    Other themes were brought up exclusively in interviews conducted with the adult sample, while others specifically targeted the sample of children8. In this report, the information presented the information presented in section 2 on sense of belonging and subjective vitality come from the adult sample. Those presented in section 3, on language practices and behaviours in the public sphere, as well as those in section 4 on access to health care services, are also drawn from the adult sample only. On the other hand, section 5 on school attendance is drawn only from the sample of children.

    Section 1.4 Potential and limitations of the Survey on the Vitality of Official-language Minorities

    The census is the most important source of information produced by Statistics Canada on the situation of official language minorities in Canada. Despite this wealth of information and the fact that the census yields information at a very detailed geographic level, other data sources lend themselves to analysing specific subjects in much greater depth. One such data source is the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities (SVOLM).

    As noted above, this survey covers a sizable number of varied themes on which much can be learned from analysing the data. However, despite the survey's great analytical potential, it has various limitations. First, the level of geographic detail must generally be limited to the provinces and, in the case of New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec, to selected regions for which reliable estimates could be obtained. Thus, for the purposes of the survey, New Brunswick was divided into three regions: the North, the Southeast and the rest of the province. In turn, Ontario was divided into five regions: the Northeast, the Southeast, the Ottawa census division, the Toronto census division and the rest of the province. For Quebec, reliable statistics can be obtained for the East, Estrie and the South, Québec and surrounding area, the West, the Montreal CMA and the rest of the province9.

    As its name indicates, the survey concerns the concept of "vitality" of official language minorities CMA and the rest of the province10. This concept has been used for at least ten years. The survey does not claim to cover all the themes and issues encompassed by the concept of vitality. Nevertheless, it examines some of the most important aspects. Also, while there may be some similarities, the concerns and issues that affect official language communities outside Quebec and those in Quebec are not identical. The same is true for concerns and issues that are specific to the official language minorities of each province, or indeed to the various regions within provinces.

    Consequently, a standardized questionnaire cannot claim to cover all the particularities of each province and region. This said, the SVOLM nevertheless sheds light on a number of themes that these provinces and regions have in common. This report presents only part of the wealth of information contained in the survey.

    The sections of the report focus on various themes. The next section is on the sense of belonging and subjective vitality. The third section presents information on language practices and behaviours in the public sphere, while the fourth section is on health care services and access to these services in the minority language. The fifth and final section tackles the themes of school attendance.

    References

    Bourhis, Richard Y. et Dominique Lepicq (2004).
    La vitalité des communautés francophone et anglophone du Québec : bilan et perspectives depuis la loi 101.
    Cahier de recherche # 11, Montréal : Chaire Concordia – UQAM en études ethniques.

    Giles, Howard and Patricia Johnson (1981).
    The Role of Language in Ethnic Group Relations
    In Intergroup Behavior, John C. Turner and Howard Giles (eds), Oxford: Blackwell.

    Giles, Howard, Richard Y. Bourhis and Donald M. Taylor (1977).
    Towards a Theory of Language in Ethnic Group Relations
    In Language Ethinicity and Intergroup relations, H. Giles (ed), pp. 307 to 348. London: Academic Press.

    Harwood, Jake, Howard Giles and Richard Y. Bourhis (1994).
    The Genesis of Vitality Theory: Historical Patterns and Discoursal Dimensions
    International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 108, pp. 167 to 206.


    Notes

    1. A list of the federal partners that participated in the funding and development of the survey is provided in Appendix G.
    2. A post-censal survey uses the census database to select a sample of respondents.
    3. Only the main methodology elements are described here, by way of introduction. Appendix A provides detailed information on the framework of the survey and its methodology.
    4. Interviewers were instructed to first approach respondents in French outside Quebec and in English in Quebec. However, at the beginning of the interview, they were told to ask respondents whether they preferred to be addressed in English or French.
    5. In the case of Newfoundland and Labrador and Prince Edward Island, the short (2A) questionnaire was used, owing to the small size of the sample of the official language minority.
    6. In consideration of the size of their respective populations, the three territories were grouped together in order to obtain statistically reliable estimates.
    7. In Quebec, the final database include a) 769 allophone adults and b) 694 allophone children whose parent has French as their first official language spoken. Appendix A on survey methodology discusses the factors that affected the final composition and size of this sub-sample.
    8. Data concerning the sample of children were collected from the parent belonging to the official language minority. Also, children were selected according to the language characteristics of one of their parents.
    9. Appendix C contains a list of the census divisions that comprise the major regions for these three provinces.
    10. This notion is explained in many studies such as Giles et al. (1977), Harwood et al. (1994) and Giles and Johnson (1981) or Bourhis and Lepicq (2004).