Ruling That Math Tests for New Teachers Were ‘Discriminatory’ Appealed in Ontario Court

A teacher walks in the hallway of a junior public school in Ontario in a file photo. (The Canadian Press/Nathan Denette)

The Ontario Court of Appeal is hearing an appeal of a lower court decision that found legislation requiring teachers to pass a mandatory math proficiency test was racist and discriminatory.

Ontario Justices David Doherty, Patrick Monahan, and Ian Nordheimer presided over the hearing livestreamed online on Oct. 16.

The case, Petrucci v. Ontario, was brought in the latter part of 2021 by the Ontario Teachers Candidates’ Council (OTCC), which opposed the 2018 provincial government decision to introduce a math proficiency test (MPT) for new teachers before they were certified, which was based on standardized test questions asked of students in grades 3, 6, and 9.

At the time, the government was concerned with lower-than-expected student math scores.

The tests were reviewed for bias and cultural insensitivity, and teachers could retake the test an unlimited number of times if they failed, according to the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF), which was granted intervener status in the appeal in support of the government’s position. Two other interveners supported the teachers’ council.

Teachers could also take the 75-question, multiple-choice test at any point during their studies for a Bachelor of Education, the court heard. Many of the math content questions allowed calculators. The government said this was intentional to allow student teachers the ability to get support from their program if they weren’t successful at an initial attempt.

Related Stories

York School Board Memo Directs Teachers to Keep Gender Transition of Students Secret From Parents

10/5/2023

MP Calls on Canadian Heritage Committee to Denounce Peel School Board Book Purge

9/28/2023

Only the teachers were informed of their test results and it was not reported to the teaching regulatory body.

A math content component was 70 percent of the test, while a pedagogy component was 30 percent of the test. Prospective teachers needed a mark of 70 percent on each part to pass. While designed as a two-hour test, teacher candidates were given three hours to write it.

“Math is not racist. In fact, arguing that a math test requirement for teachers is some form of racism is the soft bigotry of low expectations,” Christine Van Geyn, litigation director at the CCF, told The Epoch Times on Oct. 16.

“In this case, the government has made accommodations for disadvantaged groups.”

Ms. Van Geyn said the lower court stretched the concept of discrimination too far and applied equality arguments beyond the intention of the law.

She said judges could use equality “as rhetorical cover for their own policy preferences in deciding a given case.”

Lower Court Ruling

The Ontario Divisional Court ruled that the MPT was unconstitutional because there were various pass and failure rates. The teachers’ group said more “racialized candidates” failed, which indicated the tests were discriminatory and linked to racial identity.

The Ontario government appealed the decision, arguing that math is an essential skill and teachers need to be competent in math skills. Ontario argued the Division Court was in error by ruling a math test breached the charter. It said that the test itself functioned as a diagnostic tool to assess teacher competence and skills and was not onerous when “imposed on highly educated individuals who are seeking admission to a profession that’s regulated in the public interest.”

“The math proficiency test, or MPT, is a requirement intended to ensure that all teachers meet that standard before they enter the classroom,” the lawyer for the Ontario government told the court.

“Simply put, teachers need to have a basic level of competence in math to do their job. They need to be competent in math to teach that and they may have to teach it whether or not they intend to.”

The teachers’ council argued that failure on the first attempt at writing the test showed the “disproportionate impact” of the requirement on “racialized communities.” The teachers argued that black candidates had a higher failure rate, which the court questioned in terms of sample size.

The teachers’ lawyer argued that “racialized candidates” who have to keep retaking the test “see their white classmates passing,” which amounts to discrimination because the test impacts their teaching aspirations. The teachers’ position was that the tests would ultimately erode diversity in the teaching profession.

The court noted the pass rate is 97 percent for “racialized candidates,” but the lawyer for the teachers argued their rate of abandonment of the test is higher than for white candidates. The court pointed out there was no information on why black candidates decided not to take the test again, or if they would at a later date, and questioned the lawyer for teachers extensively on the small sample size and the statistical inaccuracy that could be at issue.

The court reserved its judgment for a later date after hearing from all parties.