Education & Training Professional

$30/hr

rate as listed

Workload: ~10 hrs/week
Engagement: Project-based
Location: Worldwide
Field: Education

Evaluate AI assistants by giving them realistic education or training tasks, working through the tasks over several turns, and rating the results. This remote project is designed for experienced teaching, instructional design, curriculum development, tutoring, or corporate learning professionals.

The work

You will write short prompts based on tasks that arise in education or workplace learning, then interact with an AI assistant as a real user would. That includes answering its questions, correcting faulty assumptions, requesting revisions, and testing whether it can produce a professionally useful result.

What the platform screens for

Mercor is looking for teachers, professors, tutors, instructional designers, curriculum developers, and L&D professionals with at least three years of relevant professional experience. Screening is likely to focus on whether you can describe authentic tasks from your work, identify specific educational or training defects, and support ratings with concise evidence. Occasional prior use of AI assistants is required, as is clear written English.

Logistics

The project is remote, with a flexible schedule of about 10 hours per week. It is only open to candidates in countries where the project’s assistant is available. Pay band: $30/hr

What they look for

At least 3 years of professional teaching, instructional design, or corporate training experience
Professional experience as a teacher, professor, tutor, instructional designer, curriculum developer, or L&D professional
Evaluation of educational or training materials against professional standards
Clear written English
Experience using AI assistants at least occasionally
Ability to write realistic education or training requests and concise evaluation notes

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 10 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: This checks whether the candidate can substantiate the required three years with identifiable roles, responsibilities, and timelines rather than an approximate claim.
A strong answer: A strong answer gives a clear chronology, names the educational or training settings, and explains the work performed in each role. It should make the qualifying experience easy to verify.
Where people lose it: Candidates lose points when they count informal mentoring, time spent studying education, or unrelated work without explaining how it involved professional teaching, instructional design, or training.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.