Falling Through the Cracks of Education: A Comparative Analysis of Canada’s and The United States’ Use of Standardized Testing Within the Realm of Public Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The education system is foundational to society. Public education is based on the concept of equal educational opportunities for all. Although the purpose of standardized testing is the elimination of bias to prevent certain segments of society’s students from receiving unfair academic advantages, there is little empirical verification that suggests that standardized testing actually achieves its intended purpose. In fact, the evidence indicates that standardized testing negatively impacts low-income, marginalized, and English-learning students, as achievement gaps for these groups have remained the same or have even grown with the increased use of such tests. This article will discuss the intended goals of standardized testing and their direct implications on the United States’ and Canada’s public education systems. Moreover, the article will compare the United States’ implementation of both President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act and President Barack Obama’s Every Student Succeeds Act to Ontario’s creation of the Education Quality and Accountability Office and Alberta’s implementation of Student Learning Assessments. Lastly, this article will argue that an education system that relies heavily on standardized testing to measure student achievement is conditioning students to become less creative and more automated, ultimately stagnating the development of young students’ critical thinking skills.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".