A Case Study of Teacher Candidates’ Experiences: Writing the Pilot Math Proficiency Test in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this article is on the introduction, justification, and enactment of the Mathematics Proficiency Test (MPT) by the provincial government in Ontario, Canada as a mandatory certification requirement for newly certified teachers. This article contextualizes the socio-political factors leading to the enactment of a MPT for newly certified teachers, developed and administered by the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO), which was ostensibly to mitigate the trend of declining math scores in elementary schools. It then shifts to examine the experiences of the first cohort of teacher candidates from a Canadian university who participated in writing the pilot MPT in February and March of 2020. Data was collected via survey responses administered through Qualtrics software. Survey invitations were sent to all teacher candidates who graduated in 2020 or 2021 with 50 of the 130 eligible teacher candidates responding. A thematic analysis of survey responses was conducted to discuss emerging findings about teacher candidates' experiences before, the day of, and after writing the MPT as a case study. On December 17, 2021 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled the MPT unconstitutional due to having an adverse impact on entry to the teaching profession for racialized teacher candidates.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".