Evaluate Online English Teacher candidates across 4 weighted areas: subject and technical command, how they actually teach, group management and safeguarding, and progress and communication. Subject and technical command leads at 30%, so check certification (CELTA, TEFL, TESOL hours) and grammar command: ask how they explain present perfect versus past. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.
For subject and technical command, look for evidence the candidate names their qualification and teaching hours, explains a tricky grammar point cleanly, and knows CEFR or IELTS descriptors cold. For how they actually teach, look for evidence the candidate describes a concrete lesson arc with elicitation, delayed correction, and evidence of student talk time far exceeding teacher talk.
Apply the written 1–5 anchors to every answer, record the evidence behind each rating, and use the factor weights to reach a consistent overall assessment.
Complete evaluation framework
What to assess and how to score it
Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.
01
Evaluation factor
Subject and technical command
30% weight
Check certification (CELTA, TEFL, TESOL hours) and grammar command: ask how they explain present perfect versus past simple, or IELTS band descriptors to a Band 6 learner.
Evidence to listen for
Knows the material or discipline well beyond the level they teach
Holds the qualifications, licences, or certifications required, and they are current
Can answer an unexpected question honestly rather than bluffing
Keeps learning in their own field
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Knowledge barely ahead of the learners; bluffs when asked something unexpected.
2
Needs Improvement
Adequate on the syllabus only; gaps show under questioning.
3
Satisfactory
Solid command of the material for the level taught.
4
Very Good
Depth well beyond the taught level; comfortable being asked anything.
5
Excellent
Names their qualification and teaching hours, explains a tricky grammar point cleanly, and knows CEFR or IELTS descriptors cold.
02
Evaluation factor
How they actually teach
30% weight
Probe their online lesson mechanics: screen-shared slides, whiteboard annotation, error correction timing, maximising student talk time in a 25 minute one-to-one class.
Evidence to listen for
Describes how they teach a specific thing, not their philosophy of teaching
Adapts when the first explanation does not land
Checks understanding rather than assuming it
Differentiates for varying ability within one group
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Only philosophy, no method; one explanation and no plan B.
2
Needs Improvement
Delivers content but cannot adapt when learners are lost.
3
Satisfactory
Sound instruction; differentiation is limited.
4
Very Good
Multiple routes to the same concept, with real checks for understanding.
5
Excellent
Describes a concrete lesson arc with elicitation, delayed correction, and evidence of student talk time far exceeding teacher talk.
03
Evaluation factor
Group management and safeguarding
25% weight
Assess handling of young learners on camera: parent present, unsupervised minors, safeguarding policy, plus keeping a distracted six year old engaged without a physical classroom.
Evidence to listen for
Has a concrete approach to a disruptive individual and a whole group losing focus
Knows the safeguarding or duty-of-care obligations for this age group and setting
Escalates a concern through the right channel
Sets boundaries without becoming punitive
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No behaviour strategy; unaware of safeguarding obligations.
2
Needs Improvement
Struggles with disruption; vague on duty of care.
3
Satisfactory
Manages a normal group; less confident with serious disruption.
4
Very Good
Confident group management with clear safeguarding awareness.
5
Excellent
Cites a platform safeguarding or child protection policy, and gives real tactics (props, TPR, reward systems) that held attention.
04
Evaluation factor
Progress and communication
15% weight
Look for tracking across weeks: level placement tests, recycled vocabulary, written feedback to parents or agency, retention or rebooking rates on VIPKid, Cambly, Preply or similar.
Evidence to listen for
Measures whether learners actually improved, not just attended
Gives feedback that changes what someone does next
Communicates with parents, clients, or managers about difficult progress honestly
Records progress usefully
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No sense of whether anyone improved.
2
Needs Improvement
Tracks attendance rather than progress; avoids hard conversations.
3
Satisfactory
Monitors progress; feedback is general.
4
Very Good
Measures progress concretely and handles difficult conversations well.
5
Excellent
Shows measurable learner progress (level jumps, exam scores) and high rebooking or retention, with feedback notes parents actually read.
Evidence-led prompts
Interview questions for a Online English Teacher
Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.
01
What is your previous experience teaching English?
02
Have you taught online before?
03
Do you have experience preparing students for English proficiency examinations?
04
What is your teaching philosophy?
05
What are your main methods for language practice and reinforcement?
