What the work involves
You write classroom scenarios the way they actually unfold — a K–5 lesson from planning through formative assessment, with the messy parts intact: the child who decodes fluently but can't retell, the small group that's split three ways on place value, the read-aloud that has to serve both an emergent reader and one working two grades above. Each scenario ships with a reference answer that states not only what a skilled teacher would do but the developmental reasoning behind it: why this scaffold at this stage, what the error reveals about the underlying skill, what a common alternative gets wrong.
The second half of the job is grading. You'll read model responses to scenarios — yours and others' — and score them for age appropriateness, instructional accuracy, and whether the suggested activity actually builds the skill it claims to. A recurring failure mode you'll be asked to catch: output that is charming, craft-heavy, and pedagogically empty. Labs need that flagged with a reason, not just a low score.
What the platform screens for
AfterQuery's screening is AI-led and follow-up heavy. Expect it to verify your licence and endorsement, your grade bands and years, and then push on specifics — a phonics scope and sequence you've actually taught from, how you'd interpret a particular running record, what you do when a number talk stalls. Vague pedagogical vocabulary invites another probe. Writing samples matter: the reference-answer format rewards people who can explain a decision in plain, non-jargony prose that a non-teacher reviewer can follow.
Logistics
- 100% remote, fully asynchronous — no live sessions, no fixed shifts
- Minimum commitment around 10 hours per week; you set the schedule
- Hourly pay via Stripe, disbursed weekly; rate placement within the band reflects specialization and calibration performance
- Ongoing project work rather than a fixed-term batch, with task volume varying by lab demand