The latest EQAO results show that more action is needed to support our students and help them succeed. In too many cases, dysfunction and infighting among trustees have distracted boards from this core responsibility.
— Paul Calandra (@PaulCalandra) December 3, 2025
I have taken the time to closely review these results, and… pic.twitter.com/FjvQljboJB
On December 3, 2025, Ontario's Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) finally released its standardized test results for the 2024–2025 school year. This data, which had been ready since September, painted a concerning picture, particularly in mathematics, and ignited fresh debate over the province's educational strategies and funding priorities.
The numbers reveal a persistent challenge: only 51% of Grade 6 students and 58% of Grade 9 students (combining applied and academic streams) met the provincial standard in math. This means that roughly half of Grade 6 students and four in ten Grade 9 students are not achieving the expected proficiency levels in mathematics. While reading and writing results remained relatively strong, with modest gains over the previous year, the overall trend in math achievement shows virtually no meaningful improvement over the past two years.
This stagnation comes despite the 2023 introduction of a "back-to-basics" de-streamed Grade 9 curriculum and seven years under the Progressive Conservative government. Education Minister Paul Calandra expressed being "taken aback" by the results. In response, he announced the formation of a two-person advisory panel tasked with investigating the root causes of the persistent math shortfall and recommending actionable strategies.
The panel, whose members are to be announced in early 2026, will review various aspects of the education system, including curriculum clarity, test design and alignment, teacher training and supports, funding adequacy, and strategies to close achievement gaps, particularly for students with special education needs and other equity-seeking groups. A public report with recommendations is anticipated later in 2026.
Minister Calandra emphasized the government's record-high education spending of $30.3 billion for the 2025–26 school year. He also cited other pressures such as post-pandemic recovery, mental-health challenges, and what he termed "infighting" among some school boards as contributing factors to the disappointing results.
However, critics, including the official opposition, teacher unions, and education advocacy groups, quickly linked the stagnant results to broader policy choices and funding trends under the Ford government, which took office in June 2018. They argue that real per-student funding has seen a significant decline, with some estimates suggesting a decrease of approximately $1,500 (inflation-adjusted) since 2018. This represents a cumulative shortfall of billions of dollars when compared to pre-2018 trends.
Further concerns raised by critics include an upward creep in average class sizes, especially at the secondary level, and strained labor relations stemming from successive collective agreements imposed through legislation. The province has also seen a rapid turnover of education ministers, with five individuals holding the portfolio since 2018, including the current minister who assumed the role only in September 2025.
The announcement of the two-person advisory panel, with each member potentially earning up to $1,500 per day, has sparked considerable controversy. This daily rate, potentially amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars for a part-time commitment, has been unfavorably compared to the estimated $1,500 decrease in per-student funding since 2018. Commentators were quick to highlight the symbolism: a government willing to allocate $3,000 a day for two consultants while many classrooms reportedly grapple with a lack of up-to-date textbooks, educational assistants, or reasonable student-teacher ratios.
Opposition leaders, such as NDP Leader Marit Stiles, have called the panel a "delay tactic" and suggested that the funds would be better spent directly supporting students. They argue that the problems within the education system are well-understood and do not require expensive external consultants. Instead, solutions like smaller classes, enhanced special-education supports, updated resources, and stable labor relations are proposed as more effective pathways to improvement.
While the ministry acknowledges that the 2024–2025 results show small steps forward from pandemic-era lows, with Grade 6 math scores rising by 1% to 51% and Grade 9 math scores by 3% to 58%, the broader trend in mathematics since 2018–2019 remains largely flat or slightly downward. This trend is particularly salient given Ontario's past international reputation for strong math achievement.
Looking ahead, the ministry has committed to several initiatives beyond the advisory panel. These include the faster release of future EQAO data, ideally within the same school year, continued emphasis on foundational skills and "back-to-basics" instruction, and targeted funding for tutoring, mental-health supports, and early reading screening.
The central question for parents, educators, and students across Ontario remains whether these measures, along with the forthcoming panel recommendations, will be sufficient to reverse seven years of educational stagnation. The 2024–2025 EQAO results serve as a potent reminder that incremental adjustments and high-priced reviews may not be adequate substitutes for the sustained investment and classroom-level supports that frontline educators have consistently advocated for.