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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabalho examina sistemas de testes padronizados em Ontário, no Canadá, e no Chile, comparando as ações coordenadas tomadas por ambas as nações para atingir educação de qualidade. Centrais para o trabalho são a reflexão e a análise de quem são os beneficiários finais destes sistemas de responsabilidade baseados em testes padronizados e como grupos específicos, primariamente estudantes de raça e gênero não majoritários, oprimidos por políticas neoliberais, supostamente neutras, que perpetuam e intensificam iniquidades sob o manto de eficiência e responsabilidade. O trabalho pretende visualizar possibilidades novas e alternativas que trabalhem para desnaturalizar tendências globais na educação que, apresentadas como verdades científicas, encaminham recomendações que permitem visualizar e implementar um sistema educacional centralizado, guiado e representativo dos estudantes e das comunidades locais circundantes.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".