AQA exploiting teachers

[Mrskeats]

I marked for AQA this summer; the English Language GCSE paper 2.
I have now found out that not only do they not pay for standardising as they used to but they also don't pay when you mark a 'seeded' question.
This means that I have marked hundreds pf questions without pay.
This is compounded by the fact that their pay is shocking anyway; I have worked out that I have been earning less than minimum wage.
I have written to the chief exec to complain. Anyone else shocked by how little they value people who are carrying out this important and stressful task?

Is there any truth in the rumour that AQA told examiners not to escalate scripts where extra pages had been used?

For us, seeds are just included in your script allocation. Since as a marker you have no control over how many seeds there will be in your allocation, of course you should be paid for them. Otherwise by the same logic you shouldn't be paid for any random spot-check scripts either.

*sorry, should have been clearer with that. The random spot check ones are not pre-marked seeds but are ones where the team leader just randomly selects a handful of scripts and basically second marks the paper.

"Also why should you get paid for seeds? Someone else has already marked them!"

That's a bit like hiring a tutor for your child and then refusing to pay them because school has already taught that content!

All other exam boards I ha e worked for have paid for seeds (apart from WJEC because that was still paper marking). It's the norm and tight of AQA not to pay it.

Bottom line, if you do the work, you should be paid for it. If I mark 50 scripts, I expect to be paid for 50 scripts. Not 43, because 7 were seeds.

I've not heard the extra pages rumour no

But you would only have that many seeds if your marking was shit.
If you keep passing the seeds then you get fewer, keep failing them and they keep on coming. Essential for students, parents, and teachers to have faith that the process is tight.
Though i would happily take more ££ if offered!

If you were to keep failing the seeds, shouldn't they just stop you marking further scripts? That's what happens for my exam board.

The original, if you fail 2 in a row, then yes you get stopped, But there are inconsistent markers who sail just inside getting stopped, but end up marking way more seeds than normal due to their failure rate.

I was only stopped once so my marking was fine
If you fail lots then yes you are stopped from that question completely
AQA had v tight margins on them this year
The other problem is you have no idea how many seeds you have marked so they could just say any old number to avoid paying you

Hearing this, I'm glad I'm not marking AQA.

We get paid for standardisation scripts, practice scripts and seeds and you know how many seeds you've marked because shortly after you've submitted it, you'll be sent a message from your team leader to tell you that you've marked a seed and what your mark was vs the definitive mark (even when it's the same, you still get that feedback which is reassuring because you know you are still on track). We only mark whole scripts though, not individual questions. If your marking is not within tolerance you are stopped from marking though I have never been in that situation myself.

IME for my board, you start off with more seeds and then they reduce as you get further through your allocation (and you become more familar with the paper, the typica responses and the mark scheme).

Only being stopped once means your marking was ok, but it possible to keep failing seeds and not get stopped if you are not failing consecutive seeds or three in ten. Have a look at your seed failure rate when you get your markers report and I think it is only then that Anyone can say to themselves, yes my marking was fine.
But yes theoriginal, you start out with more seeds and they become more thinly spaced as you go on providing you are passing them for AQA too.

The seeds are only part of the issue too-although I still believe other boards do pay.
Why no payment for training and standardisation?
I have been graded as an A the last few years, by the way, and have been marking for 10 years.

Not being paid for standardisation would be a big issue for me.

Some papers I mark on have standardisation with everyone is a room together paid by the hour, some via teleconference paid by a half day/day rate regardless of how long it takes and some online with chief examiner review paid by the script.

This is a vital part of the marking process and should definitely be paid for.

I don't get training as such so I don't know how that would normally be paid for, I remember a meeting once when the syllabus was changed significantly which was sort of training and was paid by the hour.

I've also been marking for nearly 10 years but my boards don't give me a grade, I work on the basis that if they keep asking me to mark I must be hitting the required standard.

I do worry about the future as the marking teams are well established but obviously getting older and on at least one of the papers new markers don't seem to last more than one sitting, edexecel have a very high threshold for being allowed to mark and I don't think they always give new examiners a chance to get to grips with the papers.

When I started I was given a lot of support and I'm not sure that chief axaminers are allowed the time to do that now, it's sink or swim which isn't good for the long term future as the experienced examiners start to retire.

Fair enough Mrskeats, but it has been your choice to continue to mark for them for ten years as certainly for my papers i have not been paid for either online standardisation or for the seeds for at least the past 6 years. You do get paid for face to face standardiastion still. It is a little strong to label it as exploitation if you have been continuing to resign new contracts foe each marking season.

Up to this year they did pay for standardisation and this seeds business is new
Paying less than minimum wage for a highly skilled, important job is exploitation in my opinion and it's getting worse.
As I said I and many others won't work for them again.

What form does your standardisation take @Rosieposy4 ?

It can't be right that you are expected to work for nothing?

In my subject the mark scheme is often tweaked slightly during the standardisation process as a result of input from the examiners, the board should recognise that standardisation makes the marking more robust and fair. I accept that this might not be the case in all subjects.

I can certainly see a situation where I might accept a contract that looks exactly the same as previous ones and not notice that the standardisation wasn't being paid, that's an easy mistake to make once. I agree that you can't really complain if it happened a second time

It can't be right that you are expected to work for nothing?

From the people I know who marked this year and didn't quit halfway through, I think the boards rely on the fact teachers know that exam marking massively improves their teaching.

It's almost as if markers feel grateful to have the opportunity to mark, and I think AQA are well aware of this. Plus, many English teachers are used to being taken for granted by their schools already, so they wouldn't think it odd that other employers treat them like shit too.

That's so true longines

Thats's interesting Longines

I'm don't currently teach the subjects that I mark in and without getting into too much detail it would be difficult for anyone with a significant teaching commitment to do the marking.

Being an examiner for me is a job, I don't do it to benefit anything else that I do so I expect to be paid for my time as I do for any other work I take on.

If boards are expecting teachers to work for nothing then they deserve to end up with not enough examiners imo

Examseason, we also don't get graded as examiners, if you've not met the standard, your team leader is expected to write a report and give one of two grades depending on how badly you failed the standard. If you met the standard, you don't get a grade and your team leader doesn't do any thing further. You know how accurate your marking is though at any point in the process because whenever you have a seed, your team leader gives you feedback very quickly to say what your mark was and what the definitive mark was and if there is any difference, where and why. You therefore always know at the time whether you are accurate or not.

Examseason, for most markers it is online, takes not too much time then a phone call with your team leader ( usually about 20/30 mins)
For team leaders upwards it is face to face.

20 mins? Not in the case of my paper. I marked ten full scripts checking training notes as I went then a phone call.
I suspect Rosie works for aqa in another capacity

@Rosieposy4 obviously we don't know what subject you mark and at what level but I mark on 6 or7 different papers across the year and standardisation does not take "not too much time"

Like @MrsKeats I usually mark 30 papers before being approved to start marking fully and have either a phone call or written feedback from the chief examiner if there's not a face to face meeting. If there is it cuts about 10 papers out but there's stiil feedback from seeds to go through.

Do you mark an academic type subject? I can see that for something like art or music maybe where you are grading talent there might not be much need for detailed standardisation but for my subjects the marking wouldn't be robust without detailed standardisation and it wouldn't be fair to the candidates

No i just mark for them, i teach full time. The question was about standardisation in particular.
You have to complete five clips for each question, it does not take terribly long, then as i say there is a phone call with your team leader. These typically, for the papers i mark on, take around 20/30 minutes per marker. I say that from both the pov of a standard marker and as a team leader, discussions with other team leaders agree that length of phone call is fairly typical.
I mark two different gcse science papers.

It is the phone calls i am referring to that take 20/30 minutes just to make that absolutely clear.