Job Discussion Forums

[Colonel Lessons]

I'm interested to know if any colleagues out there have been disappointed in any way with the system of recruiting and employing IELTS examiners for Speaking and Writing. For example, is there anybody who has spent quite a bit of money on being trained, and then got very little examining to do? If you've actually spent more on being trained than you got for marking, I'd be really interested to hear from you.
The Colonel.

[william wallace]

\nil

[mondrian]

The old rule of supply and demand.
The number of candidates in the UK is far less than over here, so the number of times you are invited to examine is less than in other countries such as China. The number of IELTS test centres is similar. One of the test centres in London is in IH. Now I am sure that IH staff will get preferential treatment, as there are no travel overheads. The examiners are already at hand. IELTS is a profit making business (?despite its Charitable status).
Finally is your IELTS contact for work personally known to you? He/she then will "see" your face when deciding who to invite to test.

[Colonel Lessons]

Mondrian's post interests me because it mentions 'travel overheads', implying that in the UK IELTS examiners are given travel expenses. Where I work (not in the UK) the suggestion that I be paid travelling expenses when I marked IELTS was greeted with alarm, and probably led to my not being invited to mark, though I quickly withdrew it when I saw how the land lay. The IELTS administrators will always tell you that what they do is 'normal practice', though of course normal practice, especially in the UK, is to give examiners travel expenses, including hotel bills and meals where applicable.
The issue of travelling expenses is a minor one, however, compared with the cost of training. Again the IELTS administrators will tell you that it is 'normal practice' for people working for an organisation to pay for their training, even when that training has absolutely no usefulness outside their work for the organisation. Again, anyone who has been anywhere knows that this is untrue; in-service training is the responsibility of the employer. It would not be such an issue if the cost of training was low and the proceeds of examining were high; but it seems to me that for IELTS increasingly the converse is true. In fact, I am beginning to suspect that some centres are deliberately recruiting too many markers - more than they know they will need. In other words, the training fees are not merely a matter of covering costs; they are a source of profit.
For example, I and at least one other teacher have paid twice as much for training with IELTS over the past year as we have earned in fees. Now we have been asked to pay another 60 pounds up front for a further bout of training, without which we will not be able to mark, though of course there is no guarantee that we'll get any marking even if we do pay up!
This is why I made the initial post. If it is true that teachers around the world are being exploited by this organisation, then something needs to be done about it. If I and my colleague were just unlucky, and generally the organisation is fine, then I'll shut up.
So, what are the facts, guys?

[leggova]

I have been an ielts examiner for 7 years and I have never had to pay for training...that sounds totally dodgy!

[kaw]

I've been an examiner for nearly 2 years and like leggova (great name btw) haven't had to pay for traininf for IELTS or any other Cambridge exams come to that. The big difference is that just before I standardised, training was PAID FOR by the BC - oh well.........
I examine the oral exams on average twice a month and the writing the same.
As regards travel expenses - they don't apply to me really being that the centre is the BC where I work but I think that the guys coming froom Saudi get travel expenses.
From people I've spoken to in Tanzania their expenses are also paid.
If they need you - it does seem that you'll be paid for it.