Teacher raters

Teachers who score real student work and tell us where scoring, human or AI, gets it wrong.

As Eticas expands its work on AI in Education in Europe and the US, we are looking to engage independent experts with different levels of expertise to make sure we have everyone at the table and different perspectives to assess our work. Engagements are remote, hourly-based and paid, with an initial defined scope.

Our work is focused on understanding how we can measure AI impacts on learning, and whether we have the tools to measure the right things and support the students who need it. We are also working to build standards so we have homogenized, comparable datasets to understand how learning is changing over time, what works and what doesn't, and for whom.

Working with schools, education authorities and edtech developers, we are testing AI scoring of complex student skills (written reasoning, collaborative problem solving, spoken reasoning) against trained teacher raters, and producing metrics and evidence that show when AI in learning can be trusted, and when it can't.

Our focus is on how AI performs on real student work, judged by real teachers, under real classroom conditions. We get as close as possible to the lived experience of learning and measure it, with the same discipline Eticas has applied for over a decade to AI in hiring, health and public services, among others.

This open call is part of our commitment to openness, inclusion and transparency, so that more voices can join this crucial work.

Score grades 6 to 8 argumentative writing against a shared rubric, after paid training and calibration with our psychometrician. Each rater scores about 70 responses, including a common set every rater scores, so we can see where trained teachers genuinely disagree.

Take part in a paid debrief after scoring on where the rubric fails real student work and what an AI scorer is likely to miss.

Optional second round in January scoring collaborative problem solving from transcripts and recordings of small-group work.

Current or recent middle school teacher, ELA or writing preferred; used to scoring student work against a rubric (state-assessment scoring is a plus, not a requirement). We are building a deliberately mixed group: different states; urban, suburban and rural schools; district and charter; high-poverty schools; teachers of multilingual learners and of students with IEPs.

For the January round, math teachers and teachers with project-based or group-work experience are especially useful.

Not a fit: tutors or edtech staff without recent classroom assessment experience.

Up to 20 hours between November 16 and mid-December: about 3-4 hours of training and calibration the week of November 16; up to 13 hours of scoring between November 23 and December 9, on your own schedule; a 1-hour debrief in mid-December.

January round (tentative): training the week of January 5, scoring January 12 to 16, around 12 hours.

Hours are close but not final, and we confirm them before anyone commits.

$75 per hour, including training and debrief, paid monthly as an independent contractor (W-9).