Comparative Analysis of Educational Systems of Accountability and Quality of Education in Ontario, Canada and Chile: Standardized Testing and its Role in Perpetuation of Educational Inequity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines Ontario, Canada and Chile test-based systems of accountability and compares the concerted actions taken by both nations to achieve quality of education. Central to the paper are a reflection on and an analysis of who are the final beneficiaries of these test-based systems of countability and how specific social groups, primarily racialized and gendered students, are marginalized and appressed through colorblind and neutral neoliberal policies that perpetuate and further intensify educational inequities under the mantle of “efficiency” and accountability”. The paper seeks to envision new and alternative possibilities that work towards denaturalizing global trends in education that are presented as scientific truths while suggesting recommendations that can enable envisioning and implementing an education system centered, guided, and accounted for by the needs of students and their surrounding local communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it