So says two Victorian teachers, who claim the sheer volume of marking and their schools’ expectations with the turnaround are impossible for some to fulfil without resorting to these measures.

“They've upped the ante with student feedback, but now teachers are so overwhelmed by it they find ways around the marking workload to try and shortcut it,” one teacher told EducationHQ.

“I know some of my colleagues are using AI marking guides to mark students’ work, they're using AI to mark assignments, they're using voice feedback (tools), they're using rubrics to tick boxes and they are outsourcing marking to other people and paying them to do it.”

Some teachers are also marking work while on lunch duty because they are so desperate, the teacher adds.

“That’s illegal – but at any point in which they can mark they try, because they're trying to speed up the process. It just never ends though.”

A continuous feedback loop 

The teacher says the need to provide continuous feedback to students and parents has become a huge focus, with a two-week turnaround policy now in place at her school. 

“The marking requirements have changed significantly. Rather than providing feedback at the beginning of the term and a semester report, now it's a continuous feedback loop and we have to be consistently communicating home about [students’] progress.

“Research suggests feedback … needs to be as immediate as possible and the two-week window is the most effective for learning.

“So, providing feedback is seen as this vital part of teaching process, even in our instructional model for how we teach.” 

Prominent education researcher John Hattie has noted the importance of not just the information provided in teachers’ feedback, but the appropriateness of its timing according to where the students are in the instructional cycle.

His meta-analysis from 2020 revealed teacher feedback had a ‘medium effect’ on student learning.

But the teacher said the volume of marking was compelling some to seek out AI help in secret.

“They don't want to admit it because they feel that it's bad practice – we spend our whole time telling students why AI is [problematic], yet we use it, because without it we can't cope.”

AI propping up unsustainable workloads

AI has become the “bread and butter” means of dealing with Department bureaucracy, the teacher adds.

“We have to do compulsory lessons plans on Compass, which is our digital platform, and teachers see that as a complete waste of time and so they usually use AI to construct their lessons plan because they don't have time.

“I think AI has allowed teachers to circumnavigate the problem that government fails to address, which is our horrendous workload – and so while they won’t admit it openly, they will use AI and sort of go back on their morals for the sake of saving everything else.”

The teacher says she is no longer willing to sacrifice her life for the job and that this is the brewing sentiment amongst her colleagues.

“The government forces teachers to make choices, and now if you're not using AI your life just becomes dictated by marking and by workload.”

AITSL data from last year shows Australian teachers are clocking up 52-hour working weeks on average, with some working up to 60 hours or even more.

Another teacher told EducationHQ that it was very difficult to complete marking during school hours.

“You’re so disrupted during the day that you have to take it home with you after staff meetings and do it in your own time. It’s impossible to focus on it otherwise.  

“Teachers are literally taking days off so they can sit at home and catch up on urgent marking because they're too overwhelmed with the volume of what they've got to get through, and especially Year 12 teachers.”

Policymakers need to spend a day in a teacher’s shoes to grasp the intensity of the job, another Melbourne educator says.

“They implement all these rules and regulations around teachers having to do more and more and more because we're trying to raise the standard.

“We're raising the standard all the time, but what they don't realise is that by piling things on teachers something then has to give. I think no longer are teachers going to choose to give away their life in the name of doing that.”

Missing guardrails

The use of AI in Victorian schools is “totally unregulated”, the teacher adds.

“We have no tools to control and to combat it and there's [vague] policies around AI use.

“So there's a lot of stress in following up with students who use it (for assignments etc) because we don't actually know what to do – we're not trained in dealing with this scourge of digital technology.”

According to guidance outlined in the Victorian Education Department's Policy and Advisory Library, schools are “strongly encouraged to ensure individuals who use generative AI tools have agency, judgement, and responsibility, and that outputs from a generative AI tool face human review prior to decisions being made".

For example, it is important that the professional judgement of teachers remains central when assessing and evaluating student progress, sequencing learning tasks, or providing student feedback, the Department notes. 

“It is also important that generative AI tools enhance rather than replace teacher and school voice. Authentic communication between teachers and students, and each school and its broader community, is crucial to building and maintaining trust." 

A recent study found teachers’ views on how their workload could be best reduced have not been fully listened to in policy circles.

Lead researcher Mihajla Gavin from University of Technology Sydney says responses to the teacher workload crisis have been mixed and even contradictory in nature across school systems and jurisdictions.