Canadian institutions post into a different market: provincial systems, two official languages, and no athletics machine to carry reach. Engagement here runs well below American peers of the same size, in every follower band we track.
Universities, colleges, polytechnics and Quebec's cégeps — funded and regulated province by province rather than nationally. Their accounts recruit domestically and internationally at once, and many of them run in French, English, or both.
Peer comparison runs against Canadian institutions rather than a continent-wide average, so a provincial college is read against its own market. French and English accounts are planned and scheduled side by side in one calendar.
Reach plans these alongside the rest of a campus's accounts, and Canada's college half reads much like the American two-year cohort.
Canadian universities, colleges and cégeps track their accounts in Reach and compare against Canadian peers rather than an American average. Named accounts follow as institutions are ready to share them.
Partly structure: there is no NCAA-scale athletics program generating weekly content with a built-in audience. The gap holds at matched follower counts, so it is not simply that Canadian accounts are bigger or smaller.
Both. The catalog now carries the college, polytechnic and cégep sector alongside universities, which is what makes a Canadian median representative rather than a read on large research institutions.
Yes. Institutions running parallel French and English accounts, or one bilingual account, plan and schedule them in the same calendar and see them beside each other in reporting.
Canadian institutions, not a North American average the far larger American sample would dominate. You can also compare against a peer list you pick yourself.
Reach measures how higher education social teams actually post, so you can compare your own accounts against the cohorts these figures come from and see the gap in your own numbers.